The consequences, momentum and action needed after Strategic Narcissism Plans are implemented.
Sex offenders: Kurt Slaven (2001), Jason Parker/Carl Brodie (2015), Craig Spence (2017), Damian Ferrari (2018), Luke Ryan (2019) Peter Ottens (2020), Christopher McRostie (2021), Luke Horsfall (2021), Gary Ryan (2021), Bryan Porker (2023).
The section makes clear there is no consent where the alleged victim:
does not have the capacity to consent due to their age; the age of consent in SA is generally 17 years, or 18 years where the complainant is under the defendant’s ‘special care’, or does not have the capacity to consent due to a lack of cognitive ability, or does not have the opportunity to consent because they are unconscious or asleep, or consents because of threats of force or terror, or consents due to being unlawfully detained, or consents because of a mistaken belief:
(a) as to the identity of the alleged offender,
(b) that the two are married,
(c) that the activity is for health or hygienic purposes, or
(d) that arises through any fraud.
The grounds upon which it may be established that the alleged victim did not consent include that he or she:
was substantially intoxicated, was intimidated, coerced or threatened in any way, or was under the authority or trust of the alleged offender.
A 2 BOOK PUBLICATION the title documenting The Road To Resolution in the POLICE VS Kurt Slaven statement with A Real-time Authored Conclusion. Autobiography UGLY HEROS - The Price Of Unlawful Enforcement. 2 x US Trade size 152 x 228 mm, Gloss Cover - 350 gsm, Pages of Autobiography - Envirocare 80 gsm, Additional Documentation - Envirocare 80 gsm, Colour photos and additional information: Satin 113 gsm edition. HISTORICAL and Royal Commission into SAPOL making Biography UGLY HEROS - The price of Unlawful Enforcement. Gripping accounts of a Regional Underworld. Life in the Shadows of the Elite STARForce team of South Australia Police. Autobiography of Marcia Anita Hobbs, Human Rights Activist, AUSTRALIA. ‘Fear Is The Root Of All Weakness®️’
"Bikers in Australia gaining further power and control within Australia using extortion. Australian politicians and a broadly compromised police force heavily involved and out of control when organised crime began to colluded against the association laws in 2012. Strategic narcissism legislation not fit for purpose from implementation. A short 4 years after ‘the world’s toughest anti-bikie laws’ were introduced, these breach of Human Rights, Constitution and Privacy laws proved furthermore unlawful when applied. Police Bruitality and gang like violence, including sex crimes against minors; driven, engaged and encouraged by the Australian Police Force the sole reason behind the biker’s in Australia aligning."
"Australia's Crimes Legislation Amendments (Serious and Organised Crime) Act 2010 were some of the worst breaches to Human Rights globally amongst developed society. Allowing for large scale corruption and global racketeering from our Country."
NATIONAL INTEGRITY SECTOR RECOMMENDATIONS - OFFICE OF PUBLIC INTEGRITY
*Australia's Crimes Legislation Amendment (Serious and Organised Crime) Act 2010 Reform.
*Measures to Combat Serious and Organised Crime Act 2001 Reform.
*Bill of Rights Australia.
*All Court Jurisdictions Nationally to be notified regarding ANY citizen(s) is active in or relevant to a Royal Commission(s) State or Nationally.
*Powers to Compel witnesses and documents.
*Court proceedings for all criminal charges.
*Exemption to Self Incriminate with No Rights of Silence.
*Public Disclosure Discretions.
*Regulated Media access to hearings; subject to confidentiality, approval for disclosures and hearing type.
*50% application of Royal Commission findings resolutions to be applied to the investigated government sector.
SAPOL - CHAIN OF CAUSATION
Criminal Negligence; flouting accountability involves First and foremost the denial of fact...
(1) The first denial is the “denial of fact”. This is the person’s refusal to acknowledge that an inappropriate act even occurred. He or she is likely to say such things as “it never happened, you’re wrong, your allegation is not true.” So the first level of acceptance is for the person to acknowledge that the problem is a real one.
(2) The second denial is “denial of impact”. This is the attempt by the person you confront to minimize the importance of the event you are bringing to their attention. At this stage a person is likely to make statements such as “it’s no big deal”, “don’t be so sensitive”, “you’re making a mountain out of a molehill.” These are all examples of how a person may downplay the importance of the problem he or she caused. The second level of acceptance is for the person to admit that the problem or infraction not only exists but that it is serious.
(3) The third denial is “denial of accountability”. This is an attempt to avoid responsibility for a misdeed through some sort of explanation that the circumstance was somehow out of the person’s control. “I was stressed out”, “I had too much to drink”, “I was in a bad mood” are all examples of attempts to deny responsibility for the problem. Sometimes the person will even try to say you brought the damage on yourself, i.e. “You made me hit you”. The third level of acceptance is for the person to assume full responsibility for the inappropriate action.
(4) The last type of denial is what I call “denial of hope.” It takes the form of refusing to acknowledge the willingness to do the work to improve the situation. “That was in the past so there’s no point in bringing it up”, “that’s just the way I am”, “nobody’s perfect” are all examples of how a person can try to duck responsibility for making things better. The fourth level of acceptance is for the person to actively demonstrate remorse and a desire to heal through words and actions.
To summarize, denial of fact says that the offense in question never happened, denial of impact trivializes the consequences of the inappropriate behavior, denial of responsibility attempts to justify or excuse the behavior, and denial of hope shows that the person is unwilling to take active steps to make things better.
Put this all together and you are likely to hear some version of the following four denials from a person you confront: “It didn’t happen like that, it’s no big deal anyway, it wasn’t even my fault and besides there’s nothing that can be done about it.”
Extract by Bill Herring LCSW, CSAT
Article: Atlanta Help for Chronic Infidelity, Porn Struggles and Sex Addiction.
Psychological Studies.
The Four Denials Of Responsibility
Submitted by Bill Herring on Sun, 02/07/2010 - 01:00