POPULAR medical practitioner Dr Jephthah Ford is claiming that the bullet which killed 21-year-old Jamaica Defence Force (JDF) Private Reneil King came from a weapon belonging to the JDF.

King was part of a joint police/military team deployed to a location on September 24, 2020 in Milk River, Clarendon on a narcotics operation, where 2,900 pounds of marijuana and a boat were seized. It was reported that while conducting a search the team came under fire from gunmen, and during the firefight Private King was shot and injured.

At the time the JDF reported that the joint team provided first aid to King before he was airlifted to May Pen Hospital and subsequently to University Hospital of the West Indies (UHWI) where he succumbed to his injuries.

However, Dr Ford, who said he was asked by Private King’s family for assistance, is challenging some aspects of the JDF’s report.

He told the Jamaica Observer that after observing the post-mortem, which was conducted last Monday, he was satisfied that King was shot by a member of the JDF.

He also said the post-mortem found that the entry and exit wounds on King’s body were consistent with that of an M4 rifle.

“An M4 is the rifle that is used by the JDF,” he said. However, he admitted that he had never seen an M4 wound in the field, or “in any gunshot with bad man”.

“I’ve never seen an M4 in the hundreds of post-mortems I’ve done involving gunshot wounds, but this was an M4… I’m satisfied that he most likely was shot by a member of the JDF,” Dr Ford alleged.

He said the soldier died on September 25 and the autopsy was not done until after an appeal for intervention was made to Prime Minister Andrew Holness in his capacity as minister of defence.

According to Dr Ford, following a series of letters between UHWI, himself and Holness, the hospital took a decision that only its doctors would be allowed in the post-mortem room. Subsequently, the body was transferred to House of Tranquillity Funeral Home and a forensic post-mortem done under the auspices of the Government.

“The family contacted me and said they would like to know if there are other circumstances they don’t know about that I could look at it, identify the cause of his death so they can be properly satisfied. The family lawyer also wrote to me, hence my interest,” Dr Ford told the Sunday Observer.

Amid his pronouncements, Dr Ford said he observed a number of irregularities on the body and in the forms submitted by UHWI during the post-mortem.

“I proceeded to tranquillity last Monday morning and found, to my distress, that the notes from the UHWI had not arrived. I sent the policeman to go and fetch it as we wanted to know what they did at the UHWI. They sent us partial notes that I think were incomplete and then adjusted when they realised I was coming,” he said.

In proceeding with the post-mortem, Dr Ford said the deceased man’s face had decomposed and he could only be identified by his mother and sister based on characteristics of the body.

Further, Dr Ford said the findings indicate that apart from the strong likelihood of the bullet belonging to a JDF weapon, there was negligence on the part of the JDF, as the soldier was not wearing a helmet and no one on the operation knew how to administer first aid to the wounded man.

“The findings, firstly, were that if the soldier was wearing a helmet, he would not have died. It entered and left at the top of his head. Within the scope of the head, if he was issued with a helmet and wearing a helmet, he would not have died. I have since then notified the chief of staff and I get to understand that instructions have been given to the entire JDF that they do not go on operations without a helmet,” Dr Ford said. “I also notice that he died from copious blood loss and I said it is impossible that they can send a team of soldiers in the field without even one person trained in first aid of such that they could stop a bleed, and this tells you the incompetence on the part of the JDF. They need to rectify that immediately.”

He also claimed that the post-mortem suggested there was no effort made at UHWI to resuscitate King, and it seems an assumption of inevitable death was made because of the entry and exit head wounds.

“The [attending] doctor and I scraped his arm. We literally rubbed off his arm to identify an IV trace that could prove they made an attempt to resuscitate him and save his life – we did not see any and I’m writing the University Hospital about that, which was negligent on their part. There was no puncture wound to show IV or blood infusion. Of all the extensive photographs we have, we did not see at any point where an attempt was made to resuscitate the soldier,” Dr Ford said.

The medical practitioner said he has written to the prime minister, the chief of defence staff and UHWI regarding his observations and he expects an inquiry into the death of Private King.

He said the post-mortem was also observed by the Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM) and a file sent to the forensic department, which he expects will demand the original docket from UHWI to determine what took place.

Describing the findings as “heart-wrenching”, Ford said based on conversations with Private King’s family, it was his dream to become a soldier, and his untimely death compounded with what he observed in the post-mortem had saddened immediate family members.

“It’s a shame because this is a young boy who has always wanted to be a soldier. If you look at his school years he did everything to be a soldier. It is a crying shame. This was somebody who was willing to serve,” Dr Ford said.

Asked to respond to Ford’s claims, the JDF said the matter regarding Private King’s death is currently being investigated by the JDF, the police and INDECOM. As a result, it is not willing to comment at this time.

Medical consultant and senior legal officer at UHWI, Dr Peter Glegg, promised a response on the situation upon completion of internal investigations regarding how events pertaining to Private King unfolded.