https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.9news.com.au/article/f15abf79-2f...

  1. 6,249 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 1036
    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.9news.com.au/article/f15abf79-2fb7-41aa-b5e5-df4c41f65466

    still subject to appeal of course

    this is the right decision IMHO

    allegedly disgruntled individuals, no matter what industry and especially not in the ADF, should never have the right to allegedly steal documents, copy documents and then distribute such documents regardless of their 'beliefs'

    the only natural recourse to discourage such behaviour and send a message to potential 'idealistic vigilantes' is to impose a severe penalty..

    If one is disgruntled, the only path is to lodge an official complaint internally and if not satisfied with the outcome, seek alternative employment

    The appeal will be fascinating but I honestly don't think it will get up unless they use 'mental illness / PTSD' defence or something along those lines.. which allegedly has been mentioned in the case

    No one wants to see a civilian go to jail but people who work within the umbrella of defence in a 'non combatant' role must abide the law, regardless of their own opinion, belief, conviction etc etc..

    an example must be set otherwise it will be a free for all with pissed off employees looking to take a shot





 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.