There is a lot of discussion everywhere, from social and traditional media to street corners, bars and living rooms, about why are Adidja “Vybz Kartel” Palmer and his co-accused free.

Most discussions are aiming criticism at the justice system, whether it be the police, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, or the Privy Council.

I am going to attempt — as simply as I can — to communicate what occurred in this matter in a language that people who are not part of the system can understand.

The investigation of the murder of Clive “Lizard” Williams was one of the most thorough investigations I have ever seen. It was beyond First World; from the forensic evidence that verified the blood and identity of the victim to the voice notes and videos that were recovered from the electronic devices.

The evidence given by the eyewitness was perfect.

The police presented a perfect case.

The prosecution did an amazing job in a difficult case that required stamina, courage, experience, and knowledge.

They proved the guilt of all four without a shadow of a doubt.

The Privy Council, in effect, overturned the conviction not because there was a problem with the investigation, but rather because the jury had been tainted and a juror was advocating to fellow jurors that that they should free the accused and accept a bribe, and a process that could have been taken was not.

This process, if followed, would have resulted in a mistrial and the four men — who many believed to have been guilty of a vicious, brutal murder — would have walked free a decade ago.

Would that have been justice? I don’t think so.

Was the Privy Council right? Well the law is subjective, and it can be interpreted one way or another. They saw it that way.

Does this mean they are wrong? No. I don’t think so, but, again, it’s subjective. So they sent it back to the local Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal didn’t see it fit to hold a retrial. Were this the correct decision? Well, I can’t think of a single trial that I was involved in that I could do over 13 years later. It would be really important that I could find the witnesses for the prosecution and I wouldn’t likely be able to, nor would they be willing.

So, if in none of my cases I could do it, I can’t see how they would be able to find all their witnesses, and then convince them to participate.

The Court of Appeal has a responsibility to ensure logic and practicality plays into its decision-making.

If the police cannot guarantee that the witnesses are all available and willing, how can the court rule that a trial be held?

The court does not exist to please the public, rather it is here to rule on legal matters, irrespective of how popular or unpopular the decision is.

The system didn’t fail. The matter was investigated, prosecuted, and the laws of the land were followed.

The fundamental failure here is that we are still using jurors in a country where gangs are involved in a war with law enforcement and the society at large.

The only failure is that we have not changed this system after 50 years of fighting the equivalent of a civil war in our country.

Did Vybz Kartel and his co-accused get away scot-free with murder? No. They spent approximately 13 years in custody. A man can’t spend 13 years in prison and you say he is unpunished.

Is the system likely to be sued?

No. There is not even a hint of malicious prosecution here, so if they do sue they will lose.

In fact, I am wondering why the family of Clive Williams is not considering civil remedies for the loss of a family member. The decision in a criminal court does not prevent them from pursuing this avenue.

Is it likely that the acquitted individuals will commit violent crimes now they are free?

Well, two of the four already have convictions in the Gun Court, one of which is still in custody serving a sentence for shooting. In one case, the accused pleaded guilty, and in the other he had a fair trial and was convicted. So those two are convicted criminals.

As it relates to the other two, who have no convictions currently, they are recording artistes and have no reason to be gangsters or commit violent crimes going forward.

I would like to think that they have learnt their lesson after 13 years in custody and would not want to push their luck.

Let us not try and blame good people for this sad outcome. Our professionals did their job and they did it according to the letter of the law.

An outdated jury system failed us; not the police, the prosecutors, or the judges.

Let us focus on fixing this so never again can any such tragedy be allowed to occur.

Our most incorruptible institution is our judges. Let them decide the fate of accused individuals, not the normal, common person who knows as much about our judicial system as I know about hairdressing.

Feedback: drjasonamckay@gmail.com