ATTORNEY-at-law Isat Buchanan, who represents Nzinga King, said her case will be brought in writing to the attorney general to seek justice for supposed violations of her rights while in police custody when her locks were trimmed.

“We are certainly going to test the situation in terms of the obvious breaches of her constitutional rights and, as I would have said, we have a reasonable attorney general who is well versed in the law. So, in writing to the Office of the Attorney General, we will see where that goes,” said Buchanan.

According to Buchanan, breaches of King’s constitutional rights would include the State’s failure to care for her while she was in State custody, the loss of her identity and privacy of her family life.

King’s issue escalated since she and her mother Shirley McIntosh claimed that a member of the Jamaica Constabulary Force assigned to the Four Paths Police Station in Clarendon forcibly trimmed King’s locks on July 22, 2021.

There has since been a ruling, in February, by Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Paula Llewellyn which indicated that police officers accused of cutting King’s locks face no criminal charges.

However, Llewellyn’s ruling was followed by the public defender’s 67-page report last week Wednesday which concluded that King’s locks were unlawfully cut by a policewoman while she was in custody at the Four Paths Police Station last year.

“We welcome the Office of the Public Defender and her findings for the simple fact [that] there is a major difference between looking at statements and coming to a ruling, and making findings from persons who you had the opportunity to ask questions and the opportunity to listen to the hearings and the account, and being put under a searchlight to see the demeanour of the witness. So clearly, the public defender had the opportunity to question the accused, under oath, and she came to her findings using the same information as the DPP, which is circumstantial evidence,” said Buchanan.

Buchanan had indicated that the furtherance of King’s case will be carried out following the her trial in June for failing to wear a mask in public, which was in breach of the then Disaster Risk Management Act.