Sydney motorcyclist dies after being hit by several vehicles
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
32 minutes ago
- ABC News
Defence lawyer accuses retired police officer of 'playing cop' before alleged Geraldton axe attack
The lawyer for two men accused of attacking a retired police officer with an axe in country Western Australia has questioned the former officer's credibility and accused him of "playing cop". Jack Seelander and Justin Troy Ernest Little allegedly assaulted former WA police sergeant Adrian Barker during a confrontation in Geraldton in March 2024. The pair faced trial over three days in the Geraldton Magistrates Court this week. The court heard Mr Barker was returning to his home in Wandina around 3am on March 17, 2024 when he passed a group of eight Aboriginal boys and men. Under cross-examination by defence lawyer Lauren Roycroft, Mr Barker admitted he thought the group would "be trouble". Mr Barker said once in his Wandina home, he sat near his front door, which was slightly ajar behind a locked flyscreen. He initially said it was left open for the breeze, but later Mr Barker admitted it was because he thought the group would attempt to break into nearby houses. Ms Roycroft put it to Mr Barker that he heard "a barely audible click", saw figures running away, then followed and confronted them. However, Mr Barker said he confronted members of the group, including Mr Seelander and Mr Little, after they attempted to break into his house. The confrontation saw Mr Barker allegedly hit Mr Little in the back of the head, knocking him to the ground. After initially running away, the court heard members of the group attacked Mr Barker, with Mr Little allegedly hitting him in the side of the face with an axe before fleeing the scene. In his closing statement on Wednesday, police prosecutor Sergeant Thomas Potts said the group had "fairly laid into Barker with a pick to the back" without being provoked. Sergeant Potts said Mr Barker "pre-emptively" struck Mr Little due to his path to flee being blocked by other members of the group. He said Mr Barker's decision to confront the group was honed by his 15 years of experience as a WA police officer. But the defence questioned Mr Barker's conduct, arguing he had pre-emptively formed "a negative view" of the group without cause. "There is a wealth of evidence that Mr Barker was the aggressor," Ms Roycroft told the court. She pointed to Mr Barker's inconsistent accounts of the incident, and his conduct immediately after the attack, as detrimental to his credibility as a witness. The court was told that after the incident, Mr Barker got into his car, pursued a car carrying a group of Aboriginal people unconnected to the attack at speed, flashed his headlights, pulled them over, and interrogated them at the side of the road. When the car's occupants asked if he was a police officer, Mr Barker answered "yep". Magistrate Matthew Walton reserved his decision, telling the court the matters were difficult, with "complexities often forgotten" in closing statements. He agreed that Mr Barker was "getting brutalised" by people in the group. The matter will return to court next month for the verdict.
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
Questions raised after ATO wiped $1m bill from Paul Keating's company
The Australian Taxation Office (ATO) is under pressure to explain why it wrote off almost $1 million in interest and late penalties owed by one of Paul Keating's companies. An ABC Four Corners investigation has revealed that over a decade ago the ATO wrote off the debt in 2015 after years of negotiations. The debt was owed by one of Paul Keating's companies but wiped after negotiations with the former prime minister and his financial advisers. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by Mr Keating or his advisers. Instead, the focus of the investigation is on why the ATO took the steps it did, given the fact that for most taxpayers formally challenging such a decision would require them to contest the matter in the Federal Court. However, the ABC reports in this instance, a payment notice was cancelled after a negotiation, raising questions about how the ATO chose to handle the matter. At the time, the Liberal Government was led by Tony Abbott and the Treasurer was Joe Hockey. There's no suggestion however that the Abbott Government was briefed on the decision to wipe the tax cut given the sensitivities around privacy and the ATO. The ATO and Mr Keating's office have been contacted for comment. The ABC's report states that the investigation raises 'questions about a lack of transparency in how the tax office conducts confidential settlements.' According to the ABC, an interest and penalties bill was issued after the ATO discovered in 2012 that Mr Keating's company, Brenlex Pty Ltd, had not reported profits from an earlier share sale. After Mr Keating was audited by the ATO in 2010 an agreement was struck according to the ABC for Mr Keating to settle tax liabilities of more than $3 million involving another of his companies, Verenna Pty Ltd. According to the ABC, Mr Keating was questioned about his other companies, including Brenlex, and his advisers confirmed it had paid a significant amount of tax relating to the sale of shares and was up to date with its tax liabilities. However, two years later the ATO discovered in 2012 that Paul Keating's company had not reported profits from a 2004 share sale. While Brenlex agreed to pay the tax debt, the ATO demanded the company pay more than $600,000 in interest and penalties which had accrued in the years since Mr Keating sold the shares. Mr Keating's advisers asked the ATO to write off this debt entirely via an ATO rule known as a 'commissioner's discretion'. The ATO commissioner at the time was Chris Jordan AO, who was appointed as the 12th Commissioner of Taxation on 1 January 2013. Mr Jordan led the ATO during the tumultuous pandemic period and during scrutiny of the ATO's role in the PwC tax leak scandal. does not suggest he was involved or aware of the decision to cancel the debt. According to the ABC, the argument over the tax debt went back and forth until the debt had grown to $904,000, at which point the ATO sent a formal notice to not waive the interest and penalties charge. 'Your request has been fully considered and it has been decided that on this occasion the circumstances detailed do not warrant remission of the GIC,' the notice said according to the ABC. 'There is a clear acknowledgment that the Company should have accounted for the disposal of shares in the relevant financial years returns and did not.' In 2015, Mr Keating's advisers became involved in the correspondence arguing the ATO should waive the bill because it was an honest mistake. As a result, 'the lodgement and payment of the Company returns were overlooked' but the tax office said 'This is not a valid justification'. In July 2015, 'a last-ditch letter from Brenlex was sent to the ATO requesting a meeting' Ten days later, the tax office sent a four-line email writing off the almost $1 million debt. 'I am able to confirm that the GIC and Late Lodgement Penalties … have been remitted in full,' the email said. 'Consequently the balance of the account has been reduced to nil and the amount payable as stated in the Creditors Statutory Demand is no longer owed.' Accounting experts have told the ABC that such negotiations are unfair because the only recourse available to taxpayers to challenge this kind of decision was an appeal to the Federal Court. This is a 'lengthy and complex process that is out of reach of most taxpayers'. The ATO's own website states 'Taxpayers should be aware that remission requests are carefully assessed to ensure a level playing field for those taxpayers who pay on time.' In a statement, the ABC told Four Corners that 'inadvertently overlooking' the need to pay tax was generally not valid grounds on which to cancel GIC. 'However, there may be instances where GIC is remitted when a taxpayer inadvertently overlooks the requirement to lodge a form or make a payment, depending on the individual circumstances of the taxpayer,' the ATO said.
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
AFL star Steven May learns his fate for divisive Carlton act
Steven May has learned his fate for his hit on Carlton forward Francis Evans that fiercely divided the AFL fraternity and led to a hugely drawn out deliberation. May's act left 23-year-old Evans bloodied with a broken nose and a displaced tooth, graded by the Match Review Officer as careless conduct, severe impact and high contact. Referred directly to the Tribunal, the AFL was seeking a three-match ban for the incident and after taking well over an hour to make a call, the charge was upheld and that is the suspension he received. FOX FOOTY, available on Kayo Sports, is the only place to watch every match of every round in the 2025 Toyota AFL Premiership Season LIVE in 4K, with no ad-breaks during play. New to Kayo? Join now and get your first month for just $1. The Demons entered a not guilty plea to the rough conduct charge and wanted the case thrown out, listing nine reasons for that stance, including May's height, the unexpected bounce of the ball and the fact he didn't jump from the ground. They argued May's contact was not unreasonable as he accelerated towards a footy that was in dispute and the defender believed he would take possession first. The AFL argued 33-year-old May had breached his duty of care, however, and they got their way, with May to serve three matches on the sideline. Fox Footy's David Zita, who was at the hearing, reported May telling the Tribunal: 'It was sort of skimming across the surface, so I definitely thought it was my ball, given how the previous couple of bounces went. 'I was surprised Evans got to the ball first and did not try to bump him, maintaining the original line. 'I attempted to slow down, but it was too late. 'I just can't believe I didn't take possession. I thought I did everything right, so I'm just a bit shocked.' The Demons were expected to strongly lean on the case of Fremantle captain Alex Pearce, who initially copped a three-game ban for his collision that concussed Port Adelaide's Darcy Byrne-Jones back in May. In that incident, the defender had his suspension overturned in what was widely considered a crucial test case for players contesting the ball in collisions which cause concussion. The verdict means May season is all but over, now missing games against St Kilda, West Coast and the Western Bulldogs, returning for the round 23 clash with the Hawks. There were a huge range of opinions over May's incident, which came in the third quarter of the Blues' eight-point win. Port Adelaide veteran Travis Boak conceded the outcome for his former teammate Evans was a terrible look, but wondered what else May could have done. 'In my view it's a footy act, in terms of he looked like he had a play on the ball,' he said on AFL 360. 'He went for the ball and the last minute his decision is 'oh no, I can't get the ball' and sort of braced and that's where the impact came from. 'I don't think there's much he can do here, he had a play for the ball until the very last second and has to make a split decision almost to protect himself. 'Unfortunately 'Frankie' gets hit in the head and the outcome looks really bad, there's a lot of blood and concussion and we don't want to see that. 'But it's a decision made at the last second so I'm not sure what else he could've done.' West Coast premiership player Will Schofield told AFL Tonight: 'Maybe we see a one-week penalty because of the outcome, but I don't think this is an act we need out of the game. 'I thought he did everything right until he didn't and those sorts of accidental outcomes, I don't think we should be penalising.' Pies great Nathan Buckley took a different stance, telling Fox Footy: 'I don't know whether our game is capable of allowing that anymore.' Many fans took the same side as Boak, but there was still a cross section of opinions on social media. One wrote on X: 'Should be nothing, stop encouraging the continued destruction of the game.' Another tweeted: 'That is 1000% a footy action, contesting the football at all times. It's not even a bump.' A third offered: 'There is no duty of care towards the player and May contacts the head.' A fourth wrote: 'S**t that's terrible, should be 5 weeks.' In the lead-up to the hearing, journalist Jon Ralph told Fox Footy's Midweek Tackle his intel regarding Melbourne's likely defence. 'They (the Demons) are convinced that Steven May will get off and they think that the Alex Pearce case is the key,' he said. 'Melbourne believes the fact that it was a marking contest for Alex Pearce, rather than a groundball, actually helps them. Because with Pearce, the ball was in the air, it wasn't moving (bouncing unpredictably) there. 'With May, on a slippery night, the ball bounced and bounced, and they felt it was absolutely going to bounce towards May. 'So, in that case, Tribunal chairman Jeff Gleeson, when he dismissed the Pearce case, said 'it has never been the Tribunal's position that a concussion inevitably results in a careless finding'. 'Adrian Anderson, the Melbourne advocate, will go to work on that statement. Pearce's testimony was absolutely compelling, so Steven May … he will tell the truth. '(Melbourne's) position is that it would actually add confusion and indeed chaos if he was actually suspended, because we would be totally confused about where we're at, when we got a bit of clarity with Alex Pearce a few weeks back.' In the end, the AFL got its way and May will be out for three weeks.
