| Revision as of 15:44, 18 September 2016 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,612 editsm Signing comment by 1.129.96.196 - "→Athomein/Dragan Vasiljkovic: new section"← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:57, 20 September 2016 edit undoAthomeinkobe (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers17,950 edits →Athomein/Dragan Vasiljkovic: responseNext edit → | ||
| Line 174: | Line 174: | ||
| To Athomein: Would I write a Court submission like that? No because I got paid a considerable amount of money for written submissions. Thinking I would send Wiki the equivalent of what would go in to written submissions means that you do not know what is involved in doing that type of work. I have even more detailed information than what I have given you. I am not writing a Wiki article but want to get rid of it. Put simply if the Extradition Act requires no evidence from Croatia and V is barred by section 19(5) from adducing evidence to contradict the Croatian allegations then there are no brute or physical facts that can be relied upon in the Australian press.There is, however an abundance of proven institutional facts in the ICTY, the U.N. Security Council and to a lesser extent the OSCE, all on the net. Why were these not used to compile the article instead of jaundiced press reports when primary sources were available on the net? The reason is lack of skill and training coupled with laziness. I have told you what some of them say and its devastating if you concentrate and put that information together. As to what is wrong with the Wiki article apart from everything including its age I have already said 1. The criminal record is wrong and the Wiki source for this error is a Croatian nationalist newspaper--pathetic 2 V has not had 13 appeals and all the Australian cases can be tracked on the austlii web site. What is annoying is that the Wiki article has been up for a long time and the only thing removed apart from their nonsense about me is the case where it was to be litigated that V was a Geneva protected person. A trained person would have zeroed in on this and asked what happened to that case? You will find it never got to final hearing because they took away V's lawyer.This was V's real case and the only case I started for him namely that V has Geneva protection status against everything that has happened to him. Remember I am the laws of war expert. Yet the case disappeared and this was V's real case namely that the Extradition Act does not apply to the laws of war and he has to be prosecuted in Australia under the old section 7 of the Geneva Conventions Act. Do you comprehend how embarrassing it would have been for the Howard govt. if it came out that Ruddock had arrested another person by mistake following the Solon debacle? There's a hint for you. Remember we are dealing with global/universal offences so where the war crimes allegedly took place is irrelevant. It is not like the ordinary criminal law where the territory on which the crime allegedly occurs is important. In war crimes proper you do not send a soldier back for trial to the enemy state for the same obvious reasons that you would not send an Australian Vietnam veteran to Vietnam for war crimes alleged to occur in Vietnam. The Wiki article says V ran for president in Serbia in 1992 so how can his years of military service be from 1991 to 1995? Do you know none of the armed conflicts were on Serbian territory proper? What does the Wiki article believe he was serving in the "war"and running for president of Serbia at the same time? V must be an electron because he can be in two places at once-- a quantum mechanical soldier! There is one war in Croatia, a different one in Bosnia and another in Kosovo. I would have thought you do not need to be a lawyer to know a person cannot do 10 years in jail without being convicted of a crime. Its backwards and is supposed to be the other way around, isn't it?. I want you to think it all through. In most cases unless there is a risk of flight, or apprehended harm to other people or the person accused, bail is granted. When people are held in custody prior to trial it is nothing like 10 years jail or even 5 years jail. Is it not supposed to be conviction first and jail second and you get credit for time served prior to conviction? Have you not realized that? If you ran a red light and caused an accident and when charged in the Courts could you say I thought "red" meant "go" not "stop" and when the law is produced showing you that "red" means "stop" do you think you could say "How am I to understand that. I am not a lawyer"? Do you realize it is now September 2016 and he is still in jail with no real prospect of getting out? I am not going to spend a lot of time doing this I am busy and do not see Misplaced Pages as a career move. I get paid to write and your getting a freebie. To expect me to spend time totally rebutting a Wiki article that has no proper sources that amount to proof is ridiculous. I know what proof is and I have told you where to find it. If you know how do proper research it will come up alibi. I am not going to spoon feed you. Misplaced Pages made (or rather copied from the press) its allegations. Now you back them up with proper sources! The press is not a source although what is ironic is that two of V's eye witnesses at times relevant to the Croatian allegations are actually two western media journalists but were prevented by section 19 (5) from giving evidence of V's innocence. I have named one of them already. There are no war crimes in the period V is in the Croatian war by Serbs against non- Serbs if you look at the ICTY indictment pattern. There are no pre-war war crimes. The law does not treat war as inevitable. I was a barrister and law lecturer for well over two decades and I have never seen the press get any Court case right and they are usually regarded as a standard joke by all competent legal practitioners at the time I practiced. The idea that they will get something right that requires sophisticated specialist legal skills that most Australian lawyers these days do not have is ridiculous. It is not unusual that the press will get victim and perpetrator mixed up and then double victimize the innocent person again. Many Australians journalists do no work, are on the booze and then trot out sensationalized garbage at the last minute to meet a deadline. I have seen this in other cases but V is the absolute ultimate example of double and even triple victimization. See if V is not guilty it spoils the story,they do not have a war criminal to write about. Do you get it? Can you imagine the consequences now if the truth comes out? I can understand attitudes although mistaken taken about V 9 years ago but how can you still hold that position in late 2016 after he has done 10 years jail without trial? How blind do you have to be to know something very strange is up? I waited all this time so the whole thing would become obviously ridiculous and wrong but Australians once they put those blinders on there is no way to get them off especially if you put them to work, I bet you also believe Australia is a free country even though anyone can be put in jail indefinitely without evidence and barred from proving their innocence to get out? I have so much more it is unbelievable and you cannot take in what I have given you so far yet you want work the equivalent of written submissions? Written submissions by the way are not evidence either but may comment on evidence. Go over what I have said already and concentrate. I have much more but V's case is STILL going on isn't it? and without a conviction or trial, to date anyway? The problem in V's case is the evidence in his favor is so large people cannot take it all in after 10 years of this. B. Slowgrove <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:43, 18 September 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | To Athomein: Would I write a Court submission like that? No because I got paid a considerable amount of money for written submissions. Thinking I would send Wiki the equivalent of what would go in to written submissions means that you do not know what is involved in doing that type of work. I have even more detailed information than what I have given you. I am not writing a Wiki article but want to get rid of it. Put simply if the Extradition Act requires no evidence from Croatia and V is barred by section 19(5) from adducing evidence to contradict the Croatian allegations then there are no brute or physical facts that can be relied upon in the Australian press.There is, however an abundance of proven institutional facts in the ICTY, the U.N. Security Council and to a lesser extent the OSCE, all on the net. Why were these not used to compile the article instead of jaundiced press reports when primary sources were available on the net? The reason is lack of skill and training coupled with laziness. I have told you what some of them say and its devastating if you concentrate and put that information together. As to what is wrong with the Wiki article apart from everything including its age I have already said 1. The criminal record is wrong and the Wiki source for this error is a Croatian nationalist newspaper--pathetic 2 V has not had 13 appeals and all the Australian cases can be tracked on the austlii web site. What is annoying is that the Wiki article has been up for a long time and the only thing removed apart from their nonsense about me is the case where it was to be litigated that V was a Geneva protected person. A trained person would have zeroed in on this and asked what happened to that case? You will find it never got to final hearing because they took away V's lawyer.This was V's real case and the only case I started for him namely that V has Geneva protection status against everything that has happened to him. Remember I am the laws of war expert. Yet the case disappeared and this was V's real case namely that the Extradition Act does not apply to the laws of war and he has to be prosecuted in Australia under the old section 7 of the Geneva Conventions Act. Do you comprehend how embarrassing it would have been for the Howard govt. if it came out that Ruddock had arrested another person by mistake following the Solon debacle? There's a hint for you. Remember we are dealing with global/universal offences so where the war crimes allegedly took place is irrelevant. It is not like the ordinary criminal law where the territory on which the crime allegedly occurs is important. In war crimes proper you do not send a soldier back for trial to the enemy state for the same obvious reasons that you would not send an Australian Vietnam veteran to Vietnam for war crimes alleged to occur in Vietnam. The Wiki article says V ran for president in Serbia in 1992 so how can his years of military service be from 1991 to 1995? Do you know none of the armed conflicts were on Serbian territory proper? What does the Wiki article believe he was serving in the "war"and running for president of Serbia at the same time? V must be an electron because he can be in two places at once-- a quantum mechanical soldier! There is one war in Croatia, a different one in Bosnia and another in Kosovo. I would have thought you do not need to be a lawyer to know a person cannot do 10 years in jail without being convicted of a crime. Its backwards and is supposed to be the other way around, isn't it?. I want you to think it all through. In most cases unless there is a risk of flight, or apprehended harm to other people or the person accused, bail is granted. When people are held in custody prior to trial it is nothing like 10 years jail or even 5 years jail. Is it not supposed to be conviction first and jail second and you get credit for time served prior to conviction? Have you not realized that? If you ran a red light and caused an accident and when charged in the Courts could you say I thought "red" meant "go" not "stop" and when the law is produced showing you that "red" means "stop" do you think you could say "How am I to understand that. I am not a lawyer"? Do you realize it is now September 2016 and he is still in jail with no real prospect of getting out? I am not going to spend a lot of time doing this I am busy and do not see Misplaced Pages as a career move. I get paid to write and your getting a freebie. To expect me to spend time totally rebutting a Wiki article that has no proper sources that amount to proof is ridiculous. I know what proof is and I have told you where to find it. If you know how do proper research it will come up alibi. I am not going to spoon feed you. Misplaced Pages made (or rather copied from the press) its allegations. Now you back them up with proper sources! The press is not a source although what is ironic is that two of V's eye witnesses at times relevant to the Croatian allegations are actually two western media journalists but were prevented by section 19 (5) from giving evidence of V's innocence. I have named one of them already. There are no war crimes in the period V is in the Croatian war by Serbs against non- Serbs if you look at the ICTY indictment pattern. There are no pre-war war crimes. The law does not treat war as inevitable. I was a barrister and law lecturer for well over two decades and I have never seen the press get any Court case right and they are usually regarded as a standard joke by all competent legal practitioners at the time I practiced. The idea that they will get something right that requires sophisticated specialist legal skills that most Australian lawyers these days do not have is ridiculous. It is not unusual that the press will get victim and perpetrator mixed up and then double victimize the innocent person again. Many Australians journalists do no work, are on the booze and then trot out sensationalized garbage at the last minute to meet a deadline. I have seen this in other cases but V is the absolute ultimate example of double and even triple victimization. See if V is not guilty it spoils the story,they do not have a war criminal to write about. Do you get it? Can you imagine the consequences now if the truth comes out? I can understand attitudes although mistaken taken about V 9 years ago but how can you still hold that position in late 2016 after he has done 10 years jail without trial? How blind do you have to be to know something very strange is up? I waited all this time so the whole thing would become obviously ridiculous and wrong but Australians once they put those blinders on there is no way to get them off especially if you put them to work, I bet you also believe Australia is a free country even though anyone can be put in jail indefinitely without evidence and barred from proving their innocence to get out? I have so much more it is unbelievable and you cannot take in what I have given you so far yet you want work the equivalent of written submissions? Written submissions by the way are not evidence either but may comment on evidence. Go over what I have said already and concentrate. I have much more but V's case is STILL going on isn't it? and without a conviction or trial, to date anyway? The problem in V's case is the evidence in his favor is so large people cannot take it all in after 10 years of this. B. Slowgrove <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:43, 18 September 2016 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| :Mr Slowgrove, you're not the only lawyer here; for what's it worth I have worked on extradition cases before too, which is why I took an interest in this article after seeing your posts. Of course I do not expect communication here to be the same level of quality that is used in court submissions, but is the use of paragraphs too much to ask for? | |||
| :If your only purpose here is to "get rid" of the article, well I can pretty much assure you that will not happen. The coverage surrounding Vasiljkovic makes him notable enough for an article. So on that basis, I will extend an offer one last time. Are there specific inaccuracies that you would like to see fixed? Please bear in mind that we are all volunteers here, so brevity and keeping it on point would be appreciated. ] (]) 00:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:57, 20 September 2016
–
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 August 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
wikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.
helpme
Hello!I edited this talk page because i don't know what is wrong with the page i edited-Dragan Vasiljković-so i would like someone to say something about it as soon as possible so i can fix it.I don't know why was that box placed on top of the article,but i would like to know what should i do to make it go away.--Captain ginyu 18:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, the article was tagged with cleanup. From the article, it needs wikification, (making links), and needs spaces between punctuation. Let me know if you require assistance. :) Gflores 19:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- The few things that I see that needed cleaning up would be:
- A citation for what issue of the journal The Australian had an article about the man, including date of publication
The article was: Serbian death squad commander alive and well and teaching golf in Perth. Natasha Robinson and Paige Taylor, The Australian, 8 September 2005. One of the journalists of this article (Natasha Robinson) was a finalist in the 2006 News Ltd "News Awards", Young Journalists of the Year category as a result of her work on this article as well as two other war crimes related articles, a further one also featuring Captain Dragan ().Merxa (talk) 02:10, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
- Clean up the punctuation and grammar of the "War crimes" section
- The last paragraph said that Australians thought that something was "absurd". What Australians said this? Was this printed anywhere? Is there a quote that can be used like "Such and such leader of the Australian government stated in an interview that "X" was absurd"?
The language used in this article is simply appalling and something needs to be done about it. I have made some head way into correcting the language and hope that someone else will do the rest.
Looks better - just a few more comments
- Lead paragraph says he is currently a golf instructor. Last sentence says he is in prison. It is not clear what order these events are in. Needs clarifying.
- There is still no reference to articles published in Australia.
'Captain Dragan raped me': woman tells trial of prison ordeal. Selma Milovanovic, The Age, April 29, 2009 - 2:38PM
Ex-prisoner tells of beatings at fortress prison Selma Milovanovic, The Age, April 29
Croatian prisoners 'forced to kiss baby bear's backside'. Selma Milovanovic, The Age, April 28, 2009
Accusers give evidence of torture. Selma Milovanovic, The Age, April 28, 2009
Alleged war criminal threatened prisoner, court told. Selma Milovanovic, The Age, April 27, 2009
Alleged war criminal to face accusers. Selma Milovanovic, The Age, April 21, 2009 Merxa (talk) 11:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
- Some copyediting is needed, but that is a lower priority than the other two comments.
If you then feel that the "clean-up" tag can be removed, I suggest you contact the person who put the tag on the page (you can find this out by looking in the page history). The person you want is User:Johntex. He may be able to say if he agrees that the tag can be removed. Hope that helps. Carcharoth 23:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Birthday
FYI: Birthday seems to differ in de:Dragan_Vasiljković... --katpatuka 08:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
B92
Really unclear what this means:
- Dragan also helped with securing the Radio station Studio B and B92 in Belgrade during popular uprising against Slobodan Milosevic and help Serbia achive freedom.
Does this mean Dragan helped shut down B92 and Studio B during the popular uprising? Helped defend it against the government's attempts to shut it down? Shermozle 05:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
POV
Well, I think this article is heading in the wrong, POV direction. On the other side he is considered a murder by all the people. as that is what he is killing innocent people.--Captain ginyu 18:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Bias
Seems like a bit of a puff piece on a member of a highly discredited organisation. It seems biased to me and references seem weak. I understand there was an article in the UK's Observer nrewspaper in 1991 which portrays a more factual light but I am unable to source it yet
Request for comment
This article expresses personal sympathies for a man against whom very serious charges of war crimes have been alleged. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Snaark (talk • contribs) 14:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC).
Proposal for Deletion AGAIN
My proposal that this article be deleted was removed without any significant changes being made. The article strongly reflects one person’s POV. I have again proposed that it be deleted. If my notice is removed again without satisfactory changes being made, I will report the author.
Below, I have explained clearly my reasons for proposing that the article be deleted. In the first paragraph, almost every sentence is written in a biased tone, or contains information that is not verifiable.
I have removed a paragraph here as per policy because this page was used to express defamatory and libelious claims.
I understand that Dragan is revered by SOME Serbs. However, he is considered a war criminal by many (Serbs and Croats). This article should not convey a POV for OR against him – it should be neutral and factual! Otherwise it should not exist!
- I am neither Serbian, not Croatian, so I have no horse in this race. However there are MANY who believe an injustice is being perpetrated against this man. 121.45.235.154 (talk) 02:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages is not a forum for you to express your own point of view, especially to lobby support for someone who is charged with a crime! That’s what Myspace is for. It is an encyclopedia – i.e. it is supposed to be objective!
Read the rules for Misplaced Pages if you want to write here! If you can’t do that, write nothing!
… been held in an Australian prison for over one and a half years with convicted prisoners, yet he himself has not been charged.
Your tone implies that he is the victim of an injustice. This is your POV!
- As an Australian, I can tell you, if a man is held for over a year without charge, then yes, it is a very unusual injustice. Especially when he was already cleared of crimes by the International Court in Hague. This is a vindictive prosecution against a good man who's only crime was to oppose the fascist Ustashe racists. 121.45.235.154 (talk) 02:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
What makes Dragans case interesting…
Interesting to who? You? You are expressing your POV.
is that even though he has been an Australian citizen for over 30 years, no evidence of the allegations against him was required by the Australian government.
Again, use a neutral tone!
If it was the USA, Canada, NZ or the UK requesting his extradition, an evidence case is mandatory (House of commons 2003).
Not verifiable!
Dragan is revered by the Serbian people because after his role in the war
Not verifiable!
The Serbian people believe…
You do not speak for all Serbs!
They are petitioning for him to face the War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague if he must face trial.
Are all Serbs in the world are signing this petition?
However, they also claim that he has already faced 18 hours of questioning at the War Crimes Tribunal and even rejected an offer of immunity for anything that he might have done. He was released and not one of his men were indicted.
Again, you are conveying YOUR point of view that he is innocent of any wrongdoing.
Therefore, the Serbian community believe that the accusations against Dragan are unfounded and are just a means to get him into Croatia. They are also surprised that Dragan (AKA Daniel Snedden) has not received the public support that David Hicks has.
This comparison is stupid - Hicks and Dragan have nothing in common.
In July 2007 Dragan was able to commence the defamation proceedings against Nationwide news. The court found that six out of ten of the statements against Dragan were libellous and defamatory.The proceedings are stood over in the Supreme Court of New South Wales until 27th July 2007.
You are only selecting the results of the trial that support your POV!.
Moving on
Could we keep all future talk below here, to make discussion easier to read please.
I have printed out 10 or so newspaper articles on this individual, and his various court appearances. Once I've read them all carefully I intend to rewrite this from scratch. I'll put a proposed outline here as soon as I am able. Kevin 04:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Please delete
I strongly agree with the contributor two places up. This is a propaganda piece for someone accused of very serious warcrimes. It is not balanced or fair. It contains very doubtful information about a living person which seems to be an effort in P.R. for his ongoing court cases. Please delete. If someone wishes to write a balanced article try sourcing an Observer (UK) article from approx 1992 and a subsequent interview on BBC's Newsnight with Jeremy Paxman. The article as it stands is damaging to Misplaced Pages Rpersse 21:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm working on a complete rewrite, probably as little more than a stub. There are plenty of sources in Australian newspapers as well to give a balanced coverage. Hopefully I'll be done this week. Kevin 21:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
- See User:Kevin/Dragan Vasiljkovic for progress, and feel free to contribute. I think a properly sourced lead paragraph is the first priority. Kevin 23:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Why are the other comments signed, but this one below is not? Anyaka (talk) 10:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Reverted to earlier version
I have reverted the article to an earlier version, before additional changes were made. The changes by this user reflects his own point of view. Considering that the subject of the article is accused of heinous war crimes, this is unnacceptable. The article still needs a complete re-write, but I do not have time for this.
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Dragan Vasiljković. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive {newarchive} to http://my.news.yahoo.com/accused-serb-war-criminal-loses-australia-extradition-appeal-061838433.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—Talk to my owner:Online 14:15, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Assessment comment
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Dragan Vasiljković/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
| Sheer self publicising bias from someone facing potential warcrimes charges. Please delete! Rpersse 21:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 21:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 13:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
the Dragan Vasiljkovic article
His criminal record is all wrong see notice board dispute pages on Dragan. He had 4 appeals not thirteen. The Commonwealth and Croatia also had an appeal and a cross appeal. He was not "in combat" in Bosnia-Herzegovina only the Krajina theater of the Croatian war. They are separate wars in separate places with separate parties. There are no Muslims for example in the Croatian war. His years of service were not from 1991 to 1995 even on the Wiki article. How can this be correct if he ran for president of Serbia in 1992? There was a ceasefire in the Krajina war in Croatia from December 1991 to January 1993 under the U.N. Vance Plan. His service was in the Krajina army from April 1991 to 3 August 1991 and then from January 1993 to December 1994. The Croatian war started on 26 August 1991 at Kijevo in the Krajina (See The Martic Case). Only Croatia believes the war started earlier in June/July 1991 and Croatia was not recognized by the E.U. or Australia until mid January 1992 .Before that the Croatian nationalists were just a pack of rebels. ABOVE ALL Dragan Vasiljkovic was 10 years in jail without charge 3 of those in solitary so how he can be tried now (still in jail) because he has already more than served his entire sentence before charged on the sentencing principles in article 24 of the ICTY Statute (that includes Yugoslav criminal sentencing practices) for the unpleaded and no evidence allegations made by Croatia to Australia? There is no High Court order putting Mr. Vasiljkovic in jail. No Court including the High Court puts a person at liberty in jail. What a Court does is determine whether someone arrested by the executive is lawfully in custody and if so extend that custody in the same or an altered form. Mr. Vasiljkovic was wrongly grabbed by the federal police in May 2010 while at liberty without an arrest warrant taken straight to jail and was never put before a Court or a magistrate for identification to determine if being grabbed without arrest warrant by the federal police was lawful. This is dynamite because he did 5 years jail 2 in solitary without Court i.d. without an arrest warrant and was sent to Croatia without being i.d.ed by an Australian Court. I can prove this if you want conclusively from the public record. Look how old the Wiki article is and he was still in jail without charge until 2016. I do not know what you can do about the article other than scrap it because if you look at all the evidence in the ICTY, have a copy of the Croatian allegations and trace through how he has been treated by the Commonwealth and the press it defies the imagination. I am not Serbian. If you want to know the full truth you will have powerful people in the Government after you because all the primary evidence and law does not lead to DV but leads back to the powerful people who have put him in jail for 10 years without charges. What judge would sit on trial of a person who has already done 10 years jail for the matters that judge has to try? A Croatian judge who is employed by the enemy state over an armed conflict where the accused person is a soldier that fought against that state under flag and uniform in that armed conflict. They ALL want to bury him so the truth will not come out. I have a lot more but as Jack Nicholson said in 'A FEW GOOD MEN' "The truth. You can't handle the truth". I can show you where most of it can be found on the net but do you really want me to./ B. Slowgrove. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.97.16 (talk) 06:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
On Dragan Vasiljkovic ; I want to deal with the western media history of the Croatian and Bosnian war in the former Yugoslavia and first note that no one is indicted in the ICTY over "the civil war in the former Yugoslavia"because there are three distinct armed conflicts with different parties in different places at different times in the former Yugoslavia. There are no Muslims in Croatian war for instance. Each ICTY indictment must relate to an actual specified armed conflict. The expression "civil war in former Yugoslavia" has reference only in the media and in context makes all media reporting on those armed conflicts misleading. All "war reporting" in the western press relates only to the war in Bosnia and is confined to the Eastern Bosnia theatre including Sarajevo where 10% of the journalists were stationed. This why there is much negative reporting on the "Serbs" instead of the eastern Bosnian Serbs. The other 90% of the press except for a few brave wanderers reported from the safety of Zagreb.This is how the misleading name "civil war in former Yugoslavia" arose and why there is no real western media reporting on the war in Croatia where Vasiljkovic served. Zagreb was also where much of the commentary of film shot in eastern Bosnia war was added and often the press commentary does not align with the film being shown. For instance there is no media reporting of the Bosnian war in the west on the Croatian forces that with Croatian local paramilitaries occupied large parts of western Bosnia beginning in June 1992 as part of a claimed enlarged Croatian state ( Source: Prlic ICTY indictment and conviction: ICTY Celebici Case concerning a jointly run Croatian and Bosnian Muslim concentration camp containing minority Bosnian Serbs in the west). So using media reports to support the Wiki article on Dragan Vasiljkovic is misleading since there was no real western media reporting on the war in Croatia that has two theaters the Krajina and Eastern Slovenia. Vasiljkovic served only in the Krajina army as a captain from April 1991 to August 1991 and then again in January 1993 to December 1994. There is a ceasefire from December 1991 to January 1993 under the Vance Plan in th Croatian war ( See UNSCRs especially in January 1993 where Croatian nationalists broke the U.N Vance Plan ceasefire, attacked the Krajina and killed UNPROFOR U.N soldiers enforcing the ceasefire and U.N safety zones. Never properly reported in western media) The Croatian war began first on 26 August 1991 at Kijevo in the Krajina and then later that month at the earliest at Vukovar in Eastern Slovenia with Arkan. Source ICTY Martic case: Arkan indictment--Arkan died before trial but each ICTY indictment is supported by prima facie evidence). Straight away you can see Vasiljkovic has nothing to do with Arkan despite Australian press assumptions. The Croatian allegations against Vasiljkovic to Australia are at Knin and Glina in late June/late July 1991 and Bruska in February 1993 ( Source Croatian warrant and request for V to Australia). The June/July 1991 allegations are based on the Croatian "political and historical account of the Home land" (this account has been repeatedly rejected by the ICTY- source rejected Gotovina amicus curiae application to ICTY on 13 October 2006 see also earlier rejected Croatian amicus rejected and criticized 6 October 2006 & ors). There are a lot of Croatian rejected amicus on this basis and none by Serbia. Croatia says the war began on 25 June 1991 with their declaration of independence. This is not accepted by the ICTY in Martic that says the Croatian war began with the JNA shelling of Kijevo on 26 August 1991 and Croatia was not recognized by the E.U or Australia until 15/16 January 1991 ( Source Australian recognition of the Republic of Australia under the Keating Labor govt). The Croatian declaration of independence of 25 June 1991 was declared illegal by the Yugoslav Constitutional Court on 30/31 October 1991 ( Source OSCE; Baddington Commission). In June/July 1991 to December 1991 especially after the E.U. Carrington plan and then Vance Plan western media reports on Yugoslavia were connected to the fall of the Berlin wall and were that the people of Yugoslavia were becoming democratic peacefully by defying conscription and throwing off the bounds of communism comparison being made to People's Power under Corizon Aquino in the Philippines in the mid-1980s. Slovenia ceded peacefully and armed conflict avoided ( Source western media press reports in late 1991).It is not until independence reaches Bosnia and their declaration of independence that western media criticism of " the war" and "Serbs"begins. The Croatian Knin allegations against Vasiljkovic are before the armed conflict began and Martic was convicted over treatment of the Knin prisoners by Martic police and also Mladic with the JNA 9th corps at the Knin barracks from 26 August 1991 i.e Kijevo onward not the Krajina army. (Source Martic indictment, findings and Appeals Chamber where V is not mentioned; Croatian Amnesty Act 1996 that declares an amnesty on all ordinary crimes having a nexus to the Croatian war that are not war crimes under international law). Vasiljkovic was politically banished from the Krajina on 3 August 1991 by Babic and Milosevic ( Source Van Lynden testimony of Sky News on or about 6 June 2006 in Martic case before Moloto J that he was with Vasiljkovic at Glina traveled with him to Knin and on the way V and his men arrested members of Martic's Serb militia for atrocities carried out at a mental hospital against Croatian elderly patients. Van Lynden then attended a farewell dinner with V and Babic in Knin. V's men without Vasiljkovic were transferred from Ubida air strip in the Krajina to Mount Fosca Gore in Serbia on 26 August 1991 and did not take part in the battle of Kijevo. V was barred from going to Mount Fosca Gora by Serbian State Security ( All sourced in ICTY Stanisic and Simatovic). V's private telephone in Belgrade was tapped by Serbian State Security ( i.e Communists) from 5 August 1991 up to about July 1992 as a potential western spy with links to the United States and western media-- no doubt Van Lynden of Sky News ( Source: ICTY Stanisic and Simatovic). All Serb ICTY war crimes occurred against non-Serbs in the Krajina were between 26 August 1991 and June 1992. V has an alibi.( See ICTY indictment pattern for Croatian war). All Glina war crimes are from September 1991 onward( Source Martic case) The only war crimes committed from January 1993 to December 1994 when V was in the Krajina war were by Croatian nationalists forces at the Medak pocket ( See ICTY indictment and rule 11 bis transfer case against Ademi).See my posts to the notice board page. I have so much more. DO YOU SEE HOW PROPER SOURCING IS DONE YET WIKIPEDIA PERSISTS WITH THIS WIKI ARTICLE SINCE AT LEAST 2007 AND DO NOT STATE THAT V WAS NOT CHARGED BY CROATIA NO EVIDENCE WAS GIVEN TO SUPPORT ITS ALLEGATIONS V WAS BANNED FROM BRINGING THE ABOVE EVIDENCE AND MUCH MORE IN AUSTRALIA( SOURCE EXTRADITION ACT) AND V HAS BEEN IN JAIL 10 YEARS ( SEE COMMONWEALTH A-G PRESS RELEASE 20 JANUARY 2006 AND FULL FEDERAL COURT 4 SEPTEMBER 2009 V WAS GRABBED AGAIN BY FEDERAL POLICE ON OR ABOUT MID MAY 2010 ACCORDING TO AUSTRALIAN MEDIA HYSTERIA BUT NOT IDENTIFIED BY THE COURTS AND THERE IS NO RECORD OF REMAND IN MAY 2010 INCLUDING 3 YEARS SPENT IN SOLITARY.V HAS SERVED HIS SENTENCE WITHOUT BEING CONVICTED (SOURCE ARTICLE 24 ICTY STATUTE SILVJICANNON CASE, PLAVISEK CASE AND BABIC CASE). SCRAP THE ARTICLE UNLESS YOU CAN DO PROPER RESEARCH AND STOP RELYING ON THE MEDIA EVERY BIT OF IT IS WRONG. IN THE WIKI ARTICLE V'S CRIMINAL RECORD IS WRONG BUT WIKI RELIES ON A CROATIAN NATIONALIST NEWSPAPER. THIS IS NOT A SOURCE. I HAVE ALREADY PROVED V'S INNOCENCE USING ICTY BUT CAN GO EVEN FURTHER. THE REMARK IN THE MARTIC JUDGMENT REFERRED TO IN THE WIKI ARTICLE IS NOT A FINDING AGAINST V AS HE IS NOT NAMED IN THE MARTIC INDICTMENT THAT STARTS IN 3 AUGUST 1991 THE DAY HE WAS SENT BACK FROM KNIN NOT GLINA- SEE MAP) TO BELGRADE SERBIA. HE WAS NOT AT GLINA THEN. IT FORGETS VAN LYNDEN TESTIMONY AND MARTIC JUDGE DID NOT HAVE THE TELEPHONE INTERCEPTS IN ICTY STANISIC AND SIMATOVIC. IT IS ONLY ONE JUDGE THERE ARE THREE OF THEM AT LEAST ON MARTIC TRIAL AND IT IS NOT IN THE MARTIC APPEAL JUDGMENT. V WAS NOT ABLE TO HAVE IT REMOVED BY LAWYERS BECAUSE V WAS UNIDENTIFIED IN JAIL IN AUSTRALIA. YOU CANNOT RELY JUST ON WHAT PEOPLE TELL YOU ESPECIALLY THE PRESS BUT YOU HAVE TO USE PROPER PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH SKILLS AND IN V'S CASE ALL THE INFORMATION IS THERE IF YOU KNOW WHERE TO LOOK AND ARE GOOD AT YOUR JOB AND UNBIASED. I AM NOT SERBIAN BUT THERE IS A LOT MORE. B.Slowgrove. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.97.59 (talk) 07:49, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- Mr Slowgrove, would you write a court submission like this? Please show a little courtesy and write legibly if you want it read. Let's start by identifying one specific error in the Misplaced Pages article, and how you would like to see it corrected. I'm willing to help you, but the above is a haystack and I'm not sure what type of needle I'm supposed to be searching for. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 01:59, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Athomein/Dragan Vasiljkovic
To Athomein: Would I write a Court submission like that? No because I got paid a considerable amount of money for written submissions. Thinking I would send Wiki the equivalent of what would go in to written submissions means that you do not know what is involved in doing that type of work. I have even more detailed information than what I have given you. I am not writing a Wiki article but want to get rid of it. Put simply if the Extradition Act requires no evidence from Croatia and V is barred by section 19(5) from adducing evidence to contradict the Croatian allegations then there are no brute or physical facts that can be relied upon in the Australian press.There is, however an abundance of proven institutional facts in the ICTY, the U.N. Security Council and to a lesser extent the OSCE, all on the net. Why were these not used to compile the article instead of jaundiced press reports when primary sources were available on the net? The reason is lack of skill and training coupled with laziness. I have told you what some of them say and its devastating if you concentrate and put that information together. As to what is wrong with the Wiki article apart from everything including its age I have already said 1. The criminal record is wrong and the Wiki source for this error is a Croatian nationalist newspaper--pathetic 2 V has not had 13 appeals and all the Australian cases can be tracked on the austlii web site. What is annoying is that the Wiki article has been up for a long time and the only thing removed apart from their nonsense about me is the case where it was to be litigated that V was a Geneva protected person. A trained person would have zeroed in on this and asked what happened to that case? You will find it never got to final hearing because they took away V's lawyer.This was V's real case and the only case I started for him namely that V has Geneva protection status against everything that has happened to him. Remember I am the laws of war expert. Yet the case disappeared and this was V's real case namely that the Extradition Act does not apply to the laws of war and he has to be prosecuted in Australia under the old section 7 of the Geneva Conventions Act. Do you comprehend how embarrassing it would have been for the Howard govt. if it came out that Ruddock had arrested another person by mistake following the Solon debacle? There's a hint for you. Remember we are dealing with global/universal offences so where the war crimes allegedly took place is irrelevant. It is not like the ordinary criminal law where the territory on which the crime allegedly occurs is important. In war crimes proper you do not send a soldier back for trial to the enemy state for the same obvious reasons that you would not send an Australian Vietnam veteran to Vietnam for war crimes alleged to occur in Vietnam. The Wiki article says V ran for president in Serbia in 1992 so how can his years of military service be from 1991 to 1995? Do you know none of the armed conflicts were on Serbian territory proper? What does the Wiki article believe he was serving in the "war"and running for president of Serbia at the same time? V must be an electron because he can be in two places at once-- a quantum mechanical soldier! There is one war in Croatia, a different one in Bosnia and another in Kosovo. I would have thought you do not need to be a lawyer to know a person cannot do 10 years in jail without being convicted of a crime. Its backwards and is supposed to be the other way around, isn't it?. I want you to think it all through. In most cases unless there is a risk of flight, or apprehended harm to other people or the person accused, bail is granted. When people are held in custody prior to trial it is nothing like 10 years jail or even 5 years jail. Is it not supposed to be conviction first and jail second and you get credit for time served prior to conviction? Have you not realized that? If you ran a red light and caused an accident and when charged in the Courts could you say I thought "red" meant "go" not "stop" and when the law is produced showing you that "red" means "stop" do you think you could say "How am I to understand that. I am not a lawyer"? Do you realize it is now September 2016 and he is still in jail with no real prospect of getting out? I am not going to spend a lot of time doing this I am busy and do not see Misplaced Pages as a career move. I get paid to write and your getting a freebie. To expect me to spend time totally rebutting a Wiki article that has no proper sources that amount to proof is ridiculous. I know what proof is and I have told you where to find it. If you know how do proper research it will come up alibi. I am not going to spoon feed you. Misplaced Pages made (or rather copied from the press) its allegations. Now you back them up with proper sources! The press is not a source although what is ironic is that two of V's eye witnesses at times relevant to the Croatian allegations are actually two western media journalists but were prevented by section 19 (5) from giving evidence of V's innocence. I have named one of them already. There are no war crimes in the period V is in the Croatian war by Serbs against non- Serbs if you look at the ICTY indictment pattern. There are no pre-war war crimes. The law does not treat war as inevitable. I was a barrister and law lecturer for well over two decades and I have never seen the press get any Court case right and they are usually regarded as a standard joke by all competent legal practitioners at the time I practiced. The idea that they will get something right that requires sophisticated specialist legal skills that most Australian lawyers these days do not have is ridiculous. It is not unusual that the press will get victim and perpetrator mixed up and then double victimize the innocent person again. Many Australians journalists do no work, are on the booze and then trot out sensationalized garbage at the last minute to meet a deadline. I have seen this in other cases but V is the absolute ultimate example of double and even triple victimization. See if V is not guilty it spoils the story,they do not have a war criminal to write about. Do you get it? Can you imagine the consequences now if the truth comes out? I can understand attitudes although mistaken taken about V 9 years ago but how can you still hold that position in late 2016 after he has done 10 years jail without trial? How blind do you have to be to know something very strange is up? I waited all this time so the whole thing would become obviously ridiculous and wrong but Australians once they put those blinders on there is no way to get them off especially if you put them to work, I bet you also believe Australia is a free country even though anyone can be put in jail indefinitely without evidence and barred from proving their innocence to get out? I have so much more it is unbelievable and you cannot take in what I have given you so far yet you want work the equivalent of written submissions? Written submissions by the way are not evidence either but may comment on evidence. Go over what I have said already and concentrate. I have much more but V's case is STILL going on isn't it? and without a conviction or trial, to date anyway? The problem in V's case is the evidence in his favor is so large people cannot take it all in after 10 years of this. B. Slowgrove — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.129.96.196 (talk) 15:43, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
- Mr Slowgrove, you're not the only lawyer here; for what's it worth I have worked on extradition cases before too, which is why I took an interest in this article after seeing your posts. Of course I do not expect communication here to be the same level of quality that is used in court submissions, but is the use of paragraphs too much to ask for?
- If your only purpose here is to "get rid" of the article, well I can pretty much assure you that will not happen. The coverage surrounding Vasiljkovic makes him notable enough for an article. So on that basis, I will extend an offer one last time. Are there specific inaccuracies that you would like to see fixed? Please bear in mind that we are all volunteers here, so brevity and keeping it on point would be appreciated. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (military) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- Misplaced Pages requested photographs of military-people
- Misplaced Pages requested photographs of people
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class Australia articles
- Low-importance Australia articles
- WikiProject Australia articles
- Unassessed Serbia articles
- Unknown-importance Serbia articles
- Unassessed Belgrade articles
- Unknown-importance Belgrade articles
- WikiProject Serbia/Belgrade articles
- WikiProject Serbia articles