Sydney siege: Gunman takes hostages in Lindt cafe

[Eric V Arachnid]

The religious don't want him, god is love blah blah, he's not one of ours, he's mentally ill.  People working in the field of mental health aren't too happy about him being tossed their way though.  He seemed pretty religious to me, maybe crazy too but it's so hard distinguish between the two, there's so much overlap. 

[Sweetdeath]

The gunman appears to have been mentally disturbed.  He was a self styled islamic cleric (apparently known in Sydney as "The Fake Sheik"). He had a series of convictions for various violent crimes and was out on bail on a charge of accessory to murder of his wife.  Apparently the bail was granted because of weaknesses in the prosecution case.  Apparently the end of the seige came about when the gunman was drifting off to sleep and the remaining hostages made a mass break for freedom and the manager of the cafe tried to wrestle the shotgun from the gunman who woke up and started shooting, killing the manager.  It is not clear how the other hostages who were shot (one fatally, one in the sholder, one in the thigh and one in the foot as well as a policemane who was hit in the cheek "by a few pellets".)  In my opinion, the police were doing the right thing, attempting to resolve the issue without anyone getting hurt, but at the ready incase something happened, which of course we now know it did.

I don't think it is useful to comment on the man's religion as a causative factor in this except as perhaps by him being predisposed to listen to the extremist venom from the IS idiots providing a tipping point force for someone who was mantally on the edge anyway.  I don't see it as being any different than any mentally disturbed person fixating on some thing or another and then launching some action that hurts others.  Is it any the worse because he was a muslim than when some xtian zealot kills a doctor outside an abortion clinic?  I am not apologising for this person, it just disturbs me when I hear bigots using the actions of some possibly psychotic person to justify vitriol against a whole class of people.

Beyond everything else, though, I feel a deep sadness for the hostages and their family and friends, especially of the two who lost their lives.  Nothing anyone can say will ease the hurt they must be feeling.

What i want to know is, why was he ever allowed out of prison if he already murdered his wife? I do not understand this. He already has various convictions! This could of been prevented, so why wasn't it?

[Bluenose]

The gunman appears to have been mentally disturbed.  He was a self styled islamic cleric (apparently known in Sydney as "The Fake Sheik"). He had a series of convictions for various violent crimes and was out on bail on a charge of accessory to murder of his wife.  Apparently the bail was granted because of weaknesses in the prosecution case.  Apparently the end of the seige came about when the gunman was drifting off to sleep and the remaining hostages made a mass break for freedom and the manager of the cafe tried to wrestle the shotgun from the gunman who woke up and started shooting, killing the manager.  It is not clear how the other hostages who were shot (one fatally, one in the sholder, one in the thigh and one in the foot as well as a policemane who was hit in the cheek "by a few pellets".)  In my opinion, the police were doing the right thing, attempting to resolve the issue without anyone getting hurt, but at the ready incase something happened, which of course we now know it did.

I don't think it is useful to comment on the man's religion as a causative factor in this except as perhaps by him being predisposed to listen to the extremist venom from the IS idiots providing a tipping point force for someone who was mantally on the edge anyway.  I don't see it as being any different than any mentally disturbed person fixating on some thing or another and then launching some action that hurts others.  Is it any the worse because he was a muslim than when some xtian zealot kills a doctor outside an abortion clinic?  I am not apologising for this person, it just disturbs me when I hear bigots using the actions of some possibly psychotic person to justify vitriol against a whole class of people.

Beyond everything else, though, I feel a deep sadness for the hostages and their family and friends, especially of the two who lost their lives.  Nothing anyone can say will ease the hurt they must be feeling.

What i want to know is, why was he ever allowed out of prison if he already murdered his wife? I do not understand this. He already has various convictions! This could of been prevented, so why wasn't it?

OK, he was not convicted of murdering his wife, he was charged with being an accessory to her murder before and after the fact, as well as some 40 sexual assault charges.  The magistrate who released him on bail did so because of weaknesses in the prosecution case.  It is easy to have 20/20 hindsight, but I don't think we can expect our judical system to lock up every person charged, just in case.  I was not present at the bail hearing and I think it unreasonable for others who were also not there to comment on the decision made.  Magistrates have a very difficult job and sometimes, acting on the best information available at the time, the results are that the charged person goes on to do something awful.  We get to hear all about the alleged rapist/murderers/thugs who go on to commit further heinous crimes when out on bail, but the vast majority do not.  This bloke was a horrible person, he had been convicted of writing highly offensive letters to the families of soldiers killed in Afghanistan, the Prime Minister and others.  Hwever, I do not agree what we can expect a magistrate to crystal ball gaze and predict what every mentally disturbed person will do, they are constrained to act within the law and I would suggest that when the magistrate made her decision she did so soberly and on the basis of the facts before her and on the basis of her previous experience.  I do not wish to live in a country that dispenses summary justice.  I prefer that proper processes are followed that the presumption of innocence is protected and that prosecuters do their job properly and thoroughly.

[Tank]

The gunman appears to have been mentally disturbed.  He was a self styled islamic cleric (apparently known in Sydney as "The Fake Sheik"). He had a series of convictions for various violent crimes and was out on bail on a charge of accessory to murder of his wife.  Apparently the bail was granted because of weaknesses in the prosecution case.  Apparently the end of the seige came about when the gunman was drifting off to sleep and the remaining hostages made a mass break for freedom and the manager of the cafe tried to wrestle the shotgun from the gunman who woke up and started shooting, killing the manager.  It is not clear how the other hostages who were shot (one fatally, one in the sholder, one in the thigh and one in the foot as well as a policemane who was hit in the cheek "by a few pellets".)  In my opinion, the police were doing the right thing, attempting to resolve the issue without anyone getting hurt, but at the ready incase something happened, which of course we now know it did.

I don't think it is useful to comment on the man's religion as a causative factor in this except as perhaps by him being predisposed to listen to the extremist venom from the IS idiots providing a tipping point force for someone who was mantally on the edge anyway.  I don't see it as being any different than any mentally disturbed person fixating on some thing or another and then launching some action that hurts others.  Is it any the worse because he was a muslim than when some xtian zealot kills a doctor outside an abortion clinic?  I am not apologising for this person, it just disturbs me when I hear bigots using the actions of some possibly psychotic person to justify vitriol against a whole class of people.

Beyond everything else, though, I feel a deep sadness for the hostages and their family and friends, especially of the two who lost their lives.  Nothing anyone can say will ease the hurt they must be feeling.

What i want to know is, why was he ever allowed out of prison if he already murdered his wife? I do not understand this. He already has various convictions! This could of been prevented, so why wasn't it?

OK, he was not convicted of murdering his wife, he was charged with being an accessory to her murder before and after the fact, as well as some 40 sexual assault charges.  The magistrate who released him on bail did so because of weaknesses in the prosecution case.  It is easy to have 20/20 hindsight, but I don't think we can expect our judical system to lock up every person charged, just in case.  I was not present at the bail hearing and I think it unreasonable for others who were also not there to comment on the decision made.  Magistrates have a very difficult job and sometimes, acting on the best information available at the time, the results are that the charged person goes on to do something awful.  We get to hear all about the alleged rapist/murderers/thugs who go on to commit further heinous crimes when out on bail, but the vast majority do not.  This bloke was a horrible person, he had been convicted of writing highly offensive letters to the families of soldiers killed in Afghanistan, the Prime Minister and others.  Hwever, I do not agree what we can expect a magistrate to crystal ball gaze and predict what every mentally disturbed person will do, they are constrained to act within the law and I would suggest that when the magistrate made her decision she did so soberly and on the basis of the facts before her and on the basis of her previous experience.  I do not wish to live in a country that dispenses summary justice.  I prefer that proper processes are followed that the presumption of innocence is protected and that prosecuters do their job properly and thoroughly.

Spot on Bluenose.

[Icarus]

I second the "spot on"

[Eric V Arachnid]

I second the "spot on"

I can't add a spot on myself, I'd need more details of the 40 disregarded sexual assault charges.