Setting: Etihad Stadium, Melbourne. Date: October 8 2011. Occasion: Melbourne Victory’s opening game of the 2011/12 A-League season.
The Conversation
“Sergeant Brown?”
“Yes, Constable White?”
“There are 250 Sydney supporters chanting ‘F*** off Melbourne.’ What do I do?”
“Issue them fines, Constable White.”
“What? All of them?’”
“Yes. All of them!”
“What about the 1000 Victory supporters who have just started chanting “F*** off Sydney?”
“Fine them as well, Constable White. Well? What are you waiting for!”
Let me explain.
Yesterday, the conservative Victorian State government announced the imminent introduction through State Parliament of on the spot fines for swearing.
If you are deemed by an officer of the Victorian Police to have sworn in an indecent, offensive or threatening manner, you will be made to contribute $240 to the state’s coffers.
No. This is not a late April Fools Joke.
Victorian Police have always had the power to charge people with indecent language offences. But they chose to do this judiciously as offenders had to be put through the court system.
Basically, you needed to behave like a complete and utter tit to find yourself in court.
Attorney-General Robert Clark explained it this way. “It frees up police time for other law enforcement activities and enables them to more readily issue penalties against those offenders who deserve them.”
Deserves them? Where do you draw the line?
Unsurprisingly, the opposition state Labor Party supported the bill, since they had originally proposed it while still in office. They were not going to be left behind in the law and order crusade to see who could create the most repressive nanny state in Australia.
Thousands of Victorians will be watching the swear-fest that is Angry Boys starring Chris Lilley tonight. But, swear in exasperation at the umpires at an AFL game, or partake in a bit of boisterous football banter for a few minutes at the football, and before you know it Constable White will be asking for your details.
Let’s hope the Victorian Police apply this ass of a law with some common sense.
Art Sapphire is the pseudonym for Athas Zafiris. He is on Twitter @ArtSapphire
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- AFL, football, Victorian government
June 1st 2011 @ 8:22am
The Bush said | June 1st 2011 @ 8:22am | Report comment
And they say Queensland is the Redneck-Police State…
June 1st 2011 @ 8:49am
kev said | June 1st 2011 @ 8:49am | Report comment
really, if i wanted to live in a nanny state, i shouldn’t have moved over from Singapore. the police might as well fine anyone who has a finger up their nose in public because i find that vulgar too. what if the offender flicks the booger and it lands on my cheek?
June 1st 2011 @ 4:08pm
Simmo said | June 1st 2011 @ 4:08pm | Report comment
that’s common assault
June 1st 2011 @ 5:25pm
Roon said | June 1st 2011 @ 5:25pm | Report comment
Not if it’s accidental or unintentional…
June 1st 2011 @ 9:12am
Ben Carter said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Hi Art – heard about those new fines. I can certainly understand people who may be offended directly by swear words (I’m not particularly myself, as a rule, although I choose to avoid using them wherever possible). And there should be a reasonably-accepted level of “barracking” permitted at sporting events (in this case) without going overboard. However, as you say, what’s the line to be drawn? If the police officer presumably needs to be there to hear it – or can someone “dob in” a swearer inside the venue via an SMS service or something? Do people run to find a police officer every time they hear a swear word from someone sitting nearby? If I was at a game (any game) in Victoria, and heard excessive (and I’m probably talking a combination of very loud/usage every second or third word in a sentence, etc) swearing I’d probably become concerned. And maybe let a match steward be made aware of it (in terms of possibly spoiling the day of others, rather than directly offending me). But warranting direct police action with a fine every time? That’s more of a tricky aspect.
June 1st 2011 @ 9:27am
Rabbitz said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:27am | Report comment
Ok first up, the fines are not new. They have been in place for sometime. The new legislation merely moves them from ‘regulation’ to ‘law’. From a practical application point of view there is no change. Have any visitors to Ethihad Staduim been fined under these regulations? Will they? I doubt it, unless they choose to abuse an official or police officer.
Secondly, why should the public accept a bunch of sports supporters chanting what are offensive slogans? Why would it be acceptable at a footy field when it is not over the dinner table or in the school yard?
Finally, this is a Sport Opinion site. If you want to carry on about political rubbish, go to a politics blog.
June 1st 2011 @ 9:31am
Roger said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Clearly it has an impact on sports – hence why it is here.
June 1st 2011 @ 10:12am
Rabbitz said | June 1st 2011 @ 10:12am | Report comment
The intent (and application) of the regs is biased at those who are abusive, in the main, at police. So where is the sports connection?
I would applaud the coppers who fined and removed abusive “supporters”.
June 1st 2011 @ 10:30am
Nelson said | June 1st 2011 @ 10:30am | Report comment
I would applaud supporters who give the heavy-handed police who “supervise” football matches a verballing that would make Kevin “Bloody” Wilson blush.
June 1st 2011 @ 1:42pm
AUdas said | June 1st 2011 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
No, they were only available under case law, they wre not regulations – you are just sprouting rubbish. Secondly I have always used them at the dinner table, school yard etc – in fact swearing is about as Australian as it gets.
June 1st 2011 @ 2:53pm
Rabbitz said | June 1st 2011 @ 2:53pm | Report comment
Actually they were introduced as a trial in 2009. Which would normally have been introduced via regulation, as it avoids the Parliament processing a bill into law. (The Minister can create regulations almost at will, without reference to Parliament.)
This new ammendment merely formalises the existing trial and therefore it needs to pass through Parliament so the Act can be ammended.
For a Low Brow explanation and some facts and figures for everyone to rant about:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/hundreds-slapped-with-fines-in-swearing-offensive-20110531-1fea1.html
June 1st 2011 @ 5:32pm
Roon said | June 1st 2011 @ 5:32pm | Report comment
Er, what’s the difference between ‘regulation’ and ‘law’?
And exactly how does legislation enable this transformation?
Finally, this is a sports opinion site. If you want to carry on spouting quasi-legal gibberish, go to Fox Sports or something…
June 1st 2011 @ 9:51am
Michael said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Just hope the coppers give boisterous fans the benefit of the doubt. Common sense and all that.
June 1st 2011 @ 9:59am
Ben of Phnom Penh said | June 1st 2011 @ 9:59am | Report comment
most likely scenario
June 1st 2011 @ 10:11am
Kuzzie said | June 1st 2011 @ 10:11am | Report comment
How long before we see police at suburban games fining us players after full time for venting our frustration for a missed shot or a bad pass?
Seems to me like another fundraiser, and Police will be busy charging people for swearing instead of ‘freeing up their time’ to deal with serious offences.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
June 1st 2011 @ 10:44am
biggdogg said | June 1st 2011 @ 10:44am | Report comment
living in western sydney, i can tell you that a law like this in NSW would only work to make everyone poorer, no1 would stop swearing and people wont pay the fines, this will lead to ppl loosing licenses and not working anymore, thus affecting the unemployment rate and generally lowering standards of life for all Aussies
June 1st 2011 @ 10:55am
Con Stamocostas said | June 1st 2011 @ 10:55am | Report comment
What do you expect from a city that was formed by bankers.
We live in Conservative times.
F#@K You Melbourne!
June 1st 2011 @ 11:27am
Art Sapphire said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:27am | Report comment
Thanks Con
June 1st 2011 @ 3:04pm
Axelv said | June 1st 2011 @ 3:04pm | Report comment
That’ll be $240!
June 1st 2011 @ 11:08am
Onlooker said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:08am | Report comment
Taking my kids to the footy – I have no problem with swearing and abusive language inn the stands being illegal. Yep – so long as a common sense approach is taken.
In most local footy there’s an ‘audible obscenity’ rule – ironically, depending upon the sensitivities of a given umpire, using the Lord’s name in vain has been known to be construed as ‘audible obscenity’.
Common sense certainly is needed.
June 1st 2011 @ 11:33am
Fussball ist unser leben said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:33am | Report comment
With the aid of a half-decent criminal barrister, it’s very likely these fines would be dismissed in the Magistrates Court.
In October 2005, charges against Mr Rufus Richardson of swearing at police officers, who were sitting in a parked police car outside The Rocks police station, were dismissed. Mr Richardson had allegedly made an offensive finger gesture and had allegedly said: “Youse are f—ed”, as he left the Orient Hotel in a drunken state.
In bringing down her decision NSW Magistrate Pat O’Shane said there were no longer “community standards” in relation to such behaviour and that type of language was “to be expected on George Street at that time of night”.
The barrister representing Mr Richardson said there were many past precedents to confirm the dismissing of swearing charges, including:
* the case of a man who, in 1989, stood outside Wollongong police station holding a sign that said “Pigs live here”
* a NSW Court of Appeal ruling in 1996 to uphold a NSW Police Tribunal ruling that swearing was “was part of police culture” – in this case, a NSW Senior Sergeant had repeatedly used of the word “f—” to a junior female officer
* a case in 2003, where a charge of offensive language was dismissed against a man who told police to “f— off” when they threatened to arrest him for his questioning their behaviour towards another man in a Darlinghurst restaurant.
Source: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/solicitor-backs-magistrate-over-swearing-at-police-decision/2005/10/18/1129401234699.html
————-
So, Art, you & your mates should be able to enjoy the HAL_v7 and continue with the “potty mouth” discourse.
June 1st 2011 @ 11:43am
Art Sapphire said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:43am | Report comment
Fuss, is this a case of paying a barrister $5000 to get you off a $240 fine just to prove a point.
Or do you see it a a collective action, where 1000 Victory supporters pay the barristers to get of fines totalling 240k
Actually, what would a barrister cost? I’m guessing, you’d probably know
June 1st 2011 @ 11:52am
Fussball ist unser leben said | June 1st 2011 @ 11:52am | Report comment
I reckon for a petty fine like this in the Vic Magistrates Court, even a “wet-behind-the-ears” & recently-admitted to the bar Junior would be able to have the charges dismissed by the Magistrate as soon as they were read in Court.
You certainly don’t need Rumpole or Geoffrey Robertson to act for this sort of case … so, certainly, it will be nothing like $5k.
And, in my opinion, the publicity that such cases inevitably attract would be worth more than any fee for service.
June 1st 2011 @ 12:04pm
whiskeymac said | June 1st 2011 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
Pat O’Shane? ’nuff said…
but in case you dont know of our own controversial magistrate”http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/news/story/official-pat-oshane-got-it-wrong/” and http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/21/1095651328495.html.
She hasnt got a great relationship with Police and regulators methinks.
Anyhooters she’s in NSW (where “offensive behaviour” is a tag you can google for similar articles and definitions etc), Arts on about Melbourne.
June 1st 2011 @ 12:24pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | June 1st 2011 @ 12:24pm | Report comment
@ whiskeymac
The different jurisdictions wouldn’t affect the validity of common law precedent, provided the judge/magistrate believes the court has applied the correct legal principle and reasoning.
Australian courts will even cite judgements from other Commonwealth countries (particularly the UK) and have also been known to cite US case law when reaching decisions.
Of course, the lower the court the less binding is the precedent and if there is conflicting case law in Victoria it could be more persuasive than a NSW decision.
June 1st 2011 @ 4:10pm
apaway said | June 1st 2011 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
Pat O’Shane rocks! Oh, hang on, sports site, gotta talk sport in case Rabbitz gets upset. Um, what about those Sea Eagles! Oh f#*&, that’s a rugby league team, this is a football story. Um, go Wednesday…