Exclusive: Family calls for inquest, saying Wilkinson visited police ‘almost every day’ before she was murdered by her husband in 2021
The police are worse than useless.
Nooo. Like their cars say, they’re there to protect and to serve and-… Oh, I see how they may have slipped up on this one. And maybe in a few other incidents… Regularly… All the time…Okay, you have a point.
Seems like false advertising. Cease and desist! If not, should be forced to add disclaimer everywhere, stating the fact that they’re not actually legally required to “protect and serve” anyone in particular. And will not be personally liable for any damages (like shooting your dog when they raid the wrong house).
There was a story on reddit about a ex husband sending death threat letters and police said, “unless you’re being raped or dead, we can’t help you.”
Send those letters to a cops wife or daughter and I guarantee they do something
“cop shopping” is also known as “finding a needle in a haystack” or “the one cop that will do the minimum of their job”.
At the beginning of April 2021, police charged Johnston with four serious domestic violence offences against Wilkinson. He was given watch house bail.
In the weeks that followed, Wilkinson attempted to speak to police “almost every day” about her concerns in relation to Johnston, her sister, Natalie Wilkinson told the Gold Coast Bulletin in 2021, including allegations he had breached the conditions of his domestic violence order.
Another sister, Danielle Carroll, said at that time that Kelly had told police, “I am scared for my life, I am scared for my children’s life. We are not safe”.
I’m curious what the cops could have actually done given existing legislation.
Were they able to arrest and detain him because he was in breach of the AVO or can’t they do anything?
If they could have done something and didn’t then they should be held accountable.
If the law is written such that they couldn’t arrest him then I’m not sure what could have changed.
It’s a frustrating thing.
This is such a weak argument. The police have a wide latitude in their discretion in the way they execute the law and almost no individual liability for any actions they take (e.g. murder, theft, rape, etc.), especially when they fear for their own lives or think someone may have broken an imaginary law that only exists inside their own head. But, when someone needs actual help and protection, suddenly their hands are tied by red tape? It’s more than frustrating, it’s straight up Orwellian doublespeak.
I don’t disagree with you in principle but I don’t want to have a situation where police detain people on the off chance they may commit a future crime.
That’s a recipe for disaster.
In this case though it could be argued that the police releasing him on bail was a mistake and the courts should have made the call.
His point stands though.
For the same reason why people sit through the CSR saying to power cycle and check the cords… Everyone has red tape they know they have to go through for their jobs. Domestic abuse cases are especially under scrutiny. Hell in my state, they HAVE to arrest someone if they show up.
Almost all of these cases stand with a crux on 1st amendment issues. Until they receive direct threats with times and ‘hows’, then it’s file a restraining order. For murderers though, it means nothing. Police aren’t exactly funded enough to plant a cruiser in front of her house too unless they think it’s imminent.
You could hire a bodyguard, but good luck if you’re remotely poor.
There’s also small merit to saying well go get a gun! You have to sleep sometimes. Only so many cameras you can put up in your home and you miss a notification.
Few people can afford a name change and just up and move. Most can’t even do that due to the legal system restricting where you can if you have children with them.
Simply put, someone who’s not full on dumb can murder anyone if they really wanted to. It’s just something every society hates thinking about.
With weekly break-ins, they could have watched the place and arrested whoever is breaking in for, you know, the crime of breaking and entering. They could have further gotten a protective order against the dude and then watched the place again after he left jail.
She didn’t report the break-in once.
If you are charged, the police may release you on bail from the watch-house. Otherwise, they must take you to court as soon as possible and release you if the court grants bail.
He was found sufficiently suspicious/liable enough in the initial investigation to warrant being arrested and given a formal charge, but still released on bail.
If police charge you with an offence, they must give you a notice to appear or a full charge sheet (also called a bench charge sheet), which provides details of the charge. Police will provide the full charge sheet if they arrest and formally charge you at the watch house.
They saw what he was doing to her, agreed enough to charge him with a crime, and then released him, with details of her complaints to the police in hand. DVO + this new offense should have been obvious that he has reoffend - the police’s behavior was completely negligent
They could’ve arrested him
In the weeks that followed, Wilkinson attempted to speak to police “almost every day” about her concerns in relation to Johnston, her sister, Natalie Wilkinson told the Gold Coast Bulletin in 2021, including allegations he had breached the conditions of his domestic violence order.
I know someone who helps run a series of shelters, where people in fear of abuse can hide. It’s not the cops, but cops sometimes send people their way. They have an ever-changing set of safe houses, and my friend can’t even say where she works in case one of the locations gets out.
I have no idea how they connect with victims though
When I tried to report my suspicions that my ex was abusing my kids, I was told by DCFS to stop stirring up trouble or I would lose custody.
Years later, my kids are old enough to be listened to, and the DA office still chose not to prosecute because it’s he-said-she-said. Both kids have mental health issues stemming from child abuse that I have to deal with on a daily basis, all while trying to juggle my mental health as a previous abuse victim from the same man.
And then they say that victims fail to report. Well, duh. It’s often safer not to.
My sister ended up losing custody for the same thing.
I begged her not to do it because I knew exactly how it would go. I said, “Seriously, you’re in a custody dispute. They’re going to treat you like you’re making this up. Wait. Be patient. I know it sucks. It just isn’t the right time for it.”
The kid is very autistic and he sits and yells at himself now, “You’re just bad Adam! You do this on purpose Adam! That’s for girls Adam! You’re not a girl Adam! You’re just a troublemaker Adam!” I wish I could remember what my mom told me he was yelling at himself about the other day, she was in tears.
I don’t know. It’s a sad situation. Her ex definitely has better resources for dealing with him (financially, which is a lot with autism as bad as his) but I can’t imagine him yelling criticisms at himself all the time if my sister didn’t lose him. He was allowed to express himself and dance and play dress up before. He don’t have that any more. Because he likes Disney princesses a lot and she had photographed him playing with dolls and things, they made a big deal about that in this small town.
Sad situation.
I wasn’t even in a dispute. I had full custody, and he had minimum visitation, which was still half the kids’ free time. And he had been convicted of domestic violence.
That poor, sweet child. We are failing our children in the guise of parent’s rights.
My sister has been through it, she really has.
The guardian ad litem hates her guts and has practically dragged her through hell.
When Adam was about 3 it really became clear that something was off with him. You couldn’t get his attention unless he wanted you to have it. He’d run in circles for long periods of time. I joined him once and I started running in the other direction and he lost his shit.
He started taking shirts and using them like wigs and singing Disney songs, and it was a huge leap in his development so my sister got him some wigs. It wasn’t just princess wigs, he had a bunch of them. Short hair, long hair, Halloween costumes as Batman, but he really gravitated toward the princess stuff. She didn’t put a limit on him or encourage one thing or the other. The ex said, “you’re gonna make him gay letting him wear that stuff.” My sister’s response was, “He isn’t going to have much of an opportunity for a sexuality, you’re overreacting.” And in truth, I can’t see him ever having a life where he’s going to be dating and things like that. It just isn’t going to happen. He communicates his needs, but he isn’t ever going to be able to be independent.
And even if he could, he makes his own decisions. When it’s time to pick out his clothes, he doesn’t try to wear dresses. It’s just an outlet for him while he plays. He understands that he’s just reenacting what he sees. He likes what he likes.
Well, once the guardian ad litem heard about that, it was 100% what she focused on. She said in court that my sister was encouraging him to be a girl and confusing him. She went in and photographed his costumes, purposely leaving out the cowboy and superhero stuff, the pompadour, the ninja turtles. She photographed the princess stuff and the dolls.
It’s a bummer. I’m not gonna lie, the first time I seen him twirling around singing “Let it Go” in a blonde wig, it made me uneasy. But seeing him smile and laugh when he usually sits expressionless was huge.
It sucks that we put so much into our roles in this world that a happy kid has to question his happiness when so many doors are closed to him already because of his condition. It really does.
You go give that kid a hug on my behalf and tell him he’s allowed to like all the Disney princesses he wants right now goddamnit
“Cop Shopping” is a gross term for them not doing their job. They never prevent or protect anything.
Wasn’t there some sort of ruling a while back that said the police are under no obligation to serve and protect, which is why that’s no longer on their cars and stuff?
Edit: Found it.
Edit 2: My bad, the article is for Australia so this doesn’t apply. I’m so used to seeing this sort of thing is the US news.
And Australians have had massive incursions on their gun rights since 2020.
Exactly, I bet her loved ones wished she had the right tools to defend herself. Lord knows the police won’t.
If only you supported education, more specifically geography, as much as you pretend to support the Constitution.
No I fully support the constitution and wish the amendments were universal human rights, not just American rights.
I love the duality of Lemmy users:
“Ohhh nooos we can’t depend upon the police!”
“Ohh nooos how dare someone suggest taking agency for their own safety ! 2A is baddd mmmkay!”
Let’s just set up a standoff where the husband, wife and one police officer all hold guns to each other. It’ll all sort itself out when the dust settles like the wild west. See I can come up with stupid politically motivated solutions too. Stupid, to say a gun will “fix” a situation involving domestic abuse. You hear that 2A’ers, THAT’S STUPID!
“She reported breaches to the police five times in the week before she was murdered and all but one officer told her to basically go away and don’t come back and just come into the station once a week because you’re coming in too often to report breaches,” criminologist Kerry Carrington told the inquest.
“Stop being a victim of crime! It’s annoying!”
