ELLINGTON… promoted cops who reported a sergeant and businessman in a gun and ammunition deal.

Ken Chaplin

One of the things that struck me during my years as director of information of the police force and media consultant to five commissioners of police was the loyalty of members of the force to each other. This became more intense down the rank and file, especially among members who were in the same squad at the training school. Even I as a civilian on secondment to the force found the spirit of loyalty hard to resist. However, the loyalty among members of the force was sometimes blind, and the protection most members of the force gave to each other at times often brought the force into disrepute and earned the wrath of many civilians.

This loyalty sometimes affected the course of justice as the quality of statements prepared by investigators in a case where a policeman was accused in the shooting of a civilian, for instance, was so bad it could not stand up in court, and the policeman was freed. It was not until after the establishment of the Bureau of Special Investigation and the appointment of Granville Gause as head of the organisation that investigations have been carried out professionally and acceptable statements prepared. Because of his impartial leadership, Gause has become the most hated officer in the police force.

Some members of the force knew that for many years guns and ammunition were being removed from the police armoury but they did not say anything in order to protect their colleagues. In 1977, I turned in my firearm and ammunition to the police for safe keeping. Years later when I tried to retrieve them, there was no trace. So the recent incident in which 19 guns,10,600 rounds of ammunition and police vests found in the home of a businessman and reported to have been stolen from the police armoury at Elletson Road Police Station, is nothing new. A total of $787,000 was also found at the house.

According to the police, three policemen and a district constable were on routine patrol in the Mountain View area when they accosted a group of people, including a sergeant acting suspiciously. The police party would not look the other way as suggested, but carried out their investigation fearlessly which led to the arrest of the sergeant and businessman. In the past, the police party might have looked the other way, especially since the sergeant was of a much higher rank. This could be the beginning of a new day in the police force. The policemen deserved the quick promotion given to them by Acting Commissioner Owen Ellington.

It has long been suspected in the police force that guns and ammunition stored at the armoury were being removed and either sold or lent to criminals, or used by policemen in illegal activities. Instead of using his service revolver, a policeman would get a gun from the armoury, use it and return it to the armoury. Of course, when his service revolver was tested, there was no ballistic evidence that it was fired recently. Some of the guns from the armoury were planted on the bodies killed by the police in “shootouts”. Until recently, security and accountability at the armoury were loose and auditing inconsistent. This was recognised by then Commissioner Frances Forbes who ordered a thorough audit shortly before he retired. The result of that audit was, of course, not known to the public. The armoury must be audited more frequently and trusted people put in charge. It would be interesting to know why the guns and ammunition stolen from the armoury were not reported missing. The public wants an answer.

Wrong move, minister

Those members of the legal profession who believe that a judge and his judgement should not be criticised ought to get rid of that notion. Anybody can criticise a judge, but must not imply malfeasance. Unless we defend and protect the character of our judges, even when we believe that their judgement might be wrong, the rule of law cannot reign supreme in a society.

Therefore, nothing was wrong with the Minister of National Security Dwight Nelson speaking out against a judge granting bail to three men accused of kidnapping a prominent St Ann businessman. The minister felt that bail should not have been granted.

This is not the first time that there has been criticism of judges granting bail to people accused of committing serious crimes. A few years ago, a commissioner of police met with the chief justice to discuss the matter of bail. The minister was even entitled to discuss the matter privately with the Minister of Justice and Attorney General Senator Dorothy Lightbourne. He was wrong to announce this publicly, and worse – he hoped she would have had a serious talk with Chief Justice Zaila McCalla. I hope this did not happen because it would be a clear interference by the executive in the judiciary which is supposed to be independent. What is more, the chief justice cannot interfere in a judgement handed down by the court or guide the court what it should or should not do.

Precincts of the court

There has been much confusion by reporters and photographers as regards the precincts of the court where photographs or videos should not be taken. This was settled years ago in discussion between the Press Association of Jamaica and the authorities.

The precincts of the court were defined as anywhere on the building which houses the court and not the courtyard. Therefore, when the Director of Public Prosecutions Paula Llewellyn was recently photographed giving an interview in the courtyard of the Corporate Area Resident Magistrate’s Court, no law was breached.

There is also a law which prohibits photographs or videos being taken of an accused by the police. I believe this law is to ensure that the identification of an accused is not revealed before an identification parade is held.