Murder victim Kelly Wilkinson repeatedly visited police in fear. They said she was ‘cop shopping’

stopthatgirl7 · 9 months ago

Murder victim Kelly Wilkinson repeatedly visited police in fear. They said she was ‘cop shopping’

@givesomefucks · 9 months ago

“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”.

@Custoslibera · edit-2 9 months ago

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.

@[email protected] · 9 months ago

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.

@Custoslibera · 9 months ago

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.

BlanketsWithSmallpox · edit-2 9 months ago

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.

@cogman · edit-2 9 months ago

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.

@Cosmonauticus · 9 months ago

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.

@[email protected] · 9 months ago

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

@Custoslibera · 9 months ago

Are you saying that police released him on bail?

@[email protected] · 9 months ago

Article clearly says:

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

I’m not a lawyer, nor an Australian lawyer, but a quick search seems that “watch house bail” is the term for “released on bail/bond” equivalent - hence the prior link to the Queensland government website.

@Custoslibera · 9 months ago

In that case then yeah they screwed up.

@AA5B · 9 months ago

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