est. 2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

On The Side Of The Law

Let the record reflect Barbados Underground (BU) supports the Royal Barbados Police Force (RBPF). Let the record also reflect BU supports the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Is there room for improvement in the offices of both? Hell yes! Commissioner Dottin can start by assuring the public that the hierarchy of the…

, , , , ,

Director of Public Prosecutions, Charles Leacock

Let the record reflect Barbados Underground (BU) supports the Royal Barbados Police Force (RBPF). Let the record also reflect BU supports the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Is there room for improvement in the offices of both? Hell yes! Commissioner Dottin can start by assuring the public that the hierarchy of the police force is singing from the same song sheet. DPP Charles Leacock can persuade us that his role is not simply to be a figurehead!

In the news recently Commissioner Darwin Dottin and DPP Charles Leacock were quoted in the local media. Commissioner Dottin took a swipe at social media and in particular another local blog. Again BU has to chide the Commissioner for speaking out of turn. His comments were completely at odds with international accords to which Barbados is a signatory.

DPP Charles Leacock, on the other hand, said that social commentators ought to refrain from making comments about cases before the courts. Given the fact that the DPP was speaking to a training class of prosecutors, it only requires a modicum of commonsense to know he was referring to criminal cases before the courts, this makes DPP Leacock  right*!

Regular citizens are aware judges hear most civil cases in chambers and decide on their judgments alone, criminal cases on the other hand it is required that they be tried by a jury. The judge in criminal cases merely functions as an umpire or referee who is obligated to instruct the jury on relevant law as it pertains to the case being tried.  The decision to determine innocence or guilt is decided by the jury.

BU has never pre-judged criminal cases, we are fortunate to have the benefit of legal counsel in the household. While we may mash the crease from time to time we have always tried to exercise the discipline to avoid being called for no-balling. Even in high profile and emotive cases, BU has been extremely careful to refer to anyone not convicted as accused and to not in any way prejudge a criminal case, or to make remarks prejudicial to a defendant that might sway any member of a potential jury pool.

Our understanding of what appeared in the media suggests this is all DPP Charles Leacock was warning against, the contamination of the jury pool. Obviously if the jury pool is contaminated, then justice is denied*. Once justice is denied to one, it follows that it would not be too long before it is denied to others.

WE should support the Director of Public Prosecutions on this issue. His comments were an appropriate reminder that, if we are not careful exercising our right to  freedom of expression, we may unwittingly be the cause of  justice being denied*.

43 responses to “On The Side Of The Law”

  1. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    Why didn’t Charles Leacock talk about the time he sent Sgt. Vaughn to terrorise the Juman girl over unpaid rent to Charles Leacock? They took her to the Police station and did a cavity search looking for Leacock’s rent. It is something that he should have mentioned.

  2. Bonny Peppa Avatar
    Bonny Peppa

    Barbadian
    But did they ever find de rent money pun she? ya badddddd

  3. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    Not a cent.

  4. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ David
    Bush Tea can’t believe that in this day and age, knowing what we know, you would support someone like Leacock in ‘hiding up’ what is going on in our justice system

    Is that not what this ‘sub judice’ thing is all about?

    Why do you think that it is so common for cases to literally disappear in Barbados? …… SILENCE!!

    Why do you think that Jippy Doyle’s case suddenly ‘came up’ after many years of silence? THE BLOGS!!

    Why do you think that Dottin suddenly find those two fire bombers? ….. THE PUBLIC OUTCRY!!

    Do not let Leacock and Dottin fool you – what is REALLY bothering them is the fact that they are losing the control that they had to decide when (and with whom) to dispense their ‘justice’…… because of the uncontrollable SCRUTINY of the blogs.

    Do not fall for that legal mumbo jumbo David….
    OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY are the very best guarantee of justice.

    What sub judice what??!!

  5. ac Avatar
    ac

    I disagree with the DPP coments about public influence on swaying the jury. Aren’t potential jurist first prejudged or question before the case as to what they know or felt about the case. Also the facts of the case when given in the court room are different to what the public have been told through hearsay or by alternative sources. The court in many high profile cases also has the right to sequister the jury until a decision is made. I think the DPP is making an attempt to muzzle public opinion which we freely have, The courts has many and varius alternatives to dealing with problems which would affect the jury pool . Let the court used them. The court should not be in the business of trying to curtail or stop people right to free speech. bull sht…..

  6. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    Least we forget.

    http://barbadosfreepress.wordpress.com/2007/09/25/demand-justice-for-ronja-juman/

  7. David Avatar
    David

    The DPP is quoting the law. If you committed a crime you would not want public opinion to prejudice the outcome in a small place like Barbados. BU agrees freedom of expression comes with responsibility as quoted in the law. As always BU will be guided by using our best judgement and the advice of our legals. Hants stated it best in an earlier comment, BU has to do whatever it takes to protect our house.

    Remember Bushie the DPP or the law is not* saying we can’t express ourselves, it is in the how. We need to educate ourselves to ensure we can satisfy the best of both worlds.

  8. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    I agree with David and BU. The DPP was not speaking about freedom of expression or in any way trying to curtail it. He was discussing matters sub judice. He was right. I am a supporter of freedom of speech and, God knows, I excercise that freedom all the time. However, I am also a supporter (lover) of Justice and I do not believe that Justice is served at all, when social commentators put in their two cents worth on criminal cases before the courts – cases that are sub judice. From the time the Police arrest a person and charge them, the matter is sub judice until the court gives a decision.

    As for the matter with Miss Juman, has the lady brought a case against Leacock? I have not heard of such. Why not? If her case is as represented by certain blogs, then many lawyers would be prepared to take it on contingency……..and please don’t tell me not. The damages would be significant and the pay day large. And if anyone is so presumptuous as to tell me not and that the lawyers require to be paid, why, I ask myself, have not Miss Juman’s public mouthpieces (the two Allard-supported blogs) come up with the money?

    I also note that to date we have heard only the side of Miss Juman. We have not heard from either Leacock or the Police. I expect we will not hear from them, unless Miss Juman files a civil action to support the verdict of her two blog mouthpieces. Now, Miss Juman MAY WELL be in the right. But I don’t know that for sure, as I have not heard both sides. By the way, under Barbados law, debt is an indictable offense – you may find out that Leacock and the Police had the law on their side.

  9. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    Doing a cavity search of a female in Barbados in a Police station in the middle of the night looking for rent is right?
    I don’t think that women will ever be treated with respect or dignity in Barbados.

  10. David Avatar
    David

    It is unfortunate the Commissioner has not seen the benefit to making the Social Media Network his friend; it is where the young people hangout for godsakes.

  11. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    Hi Amused @ 3:46am

    Quote: “From the time the Police arrest a person and charge them, the matter is sub judice until the court gives a decision”.

    Sub judice means: Before a court of Law eg under judgment, that a case or matter is currently under trial or being considered by a Judge or Court. Which does not pertain to simply being charged by the Police. Sub judice only starts when the defendent “is before the court.”

    Of course I could be wrong!!!!

  12. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @Yardbroom. From the time the Police stop having the person “help with enquiries” and actually charge them, they become “accused” and the matter has to be viewed as being sub judice. If they are just “helping with enquiries” and anyone states that they are guilty, they have a very strong case of defamation. Anything, once they are charged, that tampers with the impartiality of the impending jury pool is to be both regretted and avoided.

    We are all entitled to justice, which means, in criminal matters, an impartial jury. We have to protect this right and all other rights of citizens under the Law, no matter what our private views are.

    I thought that Commissioner Dottin was well out of order in his comments and I agree with David that Mr Dottin has given a pass to enlisting the support of the social media, which is stupid.

    However, I believe that DPP Leacock was making a very proper and correct appeal.

    Having little or no knowledge of what transpired with Miss Juman, I have no idea if the Police had reasonable grounds to suspect that she was hiding some unlawful object or substance on her person – the reaons for the search are, I am sure, well documented in the Police Report. I sincerely doubt that the search had to do with finding cash. I am giving the Police the benefit of the doubt, because of on which blogs the protest on Miss Juman’s behalf appeared – and also that those blogs were subsequently exhibited to an affidavit in a case before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on which BU has carried complete and exhaustive reports. As it seems to me that the whole object of the Ontario case was to impugne Barbados and all Bajans unjustly AND FOR PAY, I believe I have the right to approach any suggestions on the Juman matter with caution – not disbelief, but CAUTION. I do not know why a cavity seach was carried out and, until I receive SOLID evidence as to why this was done, I am not going to be drawn into that issue at all. It has NOTHING to do with the proper appeal by DPP Leacock, the object of which is to ensure an impartial jury pool in accordance to the rights of all. This is a timely reminder to think and make sure that our right to freedom of speech doesn’t trample all over the rights before the criminal courts of defendants.

  13. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    Hi Amused
    I will not pursue the point but I know I am right. If a man/woman is charged with an offence by the Police say on Friday; the Sunday papers can write about the “alleged offence” and certain minor details, in the interest of Justice.

    On Monday when he/she is brought before the Court and the trial commences sub judice comes into play, and there is a “legal restraint” not to report on the case.

    Ps: The above is just a quick example, as I am aware an adjournment will be requested by the prosecution to make further enquiries, and the defence to take proper instructions and have advance disclosure from the prosecution.

  14. David Avatar
    David

    The immediacy of the world we live in of which the social network has now taken its place demands a different approach by the COP. Yes we have to respect the protection ‘sub judice’ gives to preserving justice but some of us will always have to be prepared to play the role of watchdog/bulldog. All BU is reaffirming is our unswerving support for law and order. However we will continue to play a role which traditional media is scared shitless to play.

  15. Bonny Peppa Avatar
    Bonny Peppa

    Wait, wah ’bout Sgt. Anderson Bowen, he still pun ‘leave’? Or ya cannn discuss dah neida?

  16. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @Yardbroom. And there you have hit the nail on the head. It is an “alleged offense”. Therefore, you can certainly report the arrest and charge that “alleges” that the person has committed the offense. The moment you lose sight of the fact that the offense is not proved, you have defamed the accused, should the charge be dropped or they be found not guilty. My point is that the moment they are arraigned, it becomes sub judice and it ought to be treated as being sub judice the moment they are charged.

    My point is that we have to be responsible if we wish to protect our freedom of speech. If someone poisons the jury pool by disseminating their opinions on the case a large scale basis, they are tresspassing on the rights of the accused and of the courts.

    Whether you like the DPP or not (and many do not) his comments were correct. I give you an example of how the system can be abused. Years ago (about between 12 and 15) there was a murder case I was following in the US courts. It was a very sensational one. The trial was in progress, when one of the US networks aired a drama (with no name changes) on that murder, concluding that the accused were guilty. How does anyone know that members of the jury did not view and were not swayed by that drama? I was very disturbed by it. I believe that the jury is question happened to be sequestered and not allowed to view the show and the defendants were found guilty. But I hope you see the danger.

    I don’t think that the DPP’s comments could be taken to mean that we ought not to comment on the courts and their administration of justice. The DPP deals strictly with criminal matters and the people to whom he was speaking were prosecutors. I note the DPP also cautioned them that their job was not to secure convictions, but to ensure that justice was done. In the context, therefore, it is obvious to me that the DPP’s remarks were made in order to ensure that justice was done. Not to inhibit freedom of speech. I wish I could say the same for the remarks of Commissioner Dottin.

    Social commentators have a right and obligation to complain about the courts and their officers – and the police – if the system is not working. Because if the system is not working, then justice is being denied. By the same token, therefore, I believe that we ourselves must take care not to be the instruments of any denial of justice. I agree with David – hit the places that don’t work and any delinquent public servants whose wages we pay and hit them hard. But ensure that we ourselves, as social commentators, are not instrumental in doing the very things we complain of.

  17. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    Hi Amused
    Quote: 3:30pm “@ Yardbroom. And there you have hit the nail on the head. It is an “alleged offence”. Therefore, you can certainly report the arrest and charge that “alleges” that the person has committed the offence. The moment you lose sight of the fact that the offence is not proved, you have defamed the accused, should the charge be dropped or they be found not guilty. My point is that the moment they are arrainged, it becomes sub judice and it ought to be treated as being sub judice the moment they are charged”.
    *********************************
    You wrote on Sep 24 @ 3:46am
    Quote:”From the time the Police arrest a person and charge them, the matter is sub judice until the court gives a decision”

    It is this comment, the above at 3:46am that I made a remark on, because it is not true.

    You have followed up at 3:30 with Quote: “My point is that the moment they are arrainged, it becomes sub judice.”

    The two statements are “not the same”:
    “Arraign means: To bring a prisoner “before the Court” you did not use the word “arraign” at 3:46Am.

    You said “from the time the Police arrest a person and charge them the matter is subjudice.”

    I hope you see the “fundamental” difference.
    Sub Judice: Means “before a Court of Law”
    **************************************
    As an aside, I too believe in responsible blogging and I try to exercise that in everything I post.

  18. Expat Avatar
    Expat

    The real question is how many Guyanese has he arrested and sent back home. Not a single Guyanese sent back home in their jammies in over a year. He is failing in his duty.

  19. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ Amused
    If someone poisons the jury pool by disseminating their opinions on the case a large scale basis, they are trespassing on the rights of the accused and of the courts.
    *************************************************
    ..spoken like a true lawyer.
    But surely you are confusing two different issues. Bush Tea’s problem is with the concept of ‘sub judice’, which in Barbados has meant that once a matter is in the justice system there is to be NO PUBLIC DISCUSSION on that matter.
    This results in a situation where matters routinely disappear from sight…. especially where influential persons, connected persons or rite persons are involved.

    Years afterward, when other events have overtaken the matter -we hear that ‘charges are withdrawn’ or ‘witnesses have withdrawn’ or that files have been lost…

    The argument that you have made (well), relates to contempt of court, and defamation. One has to agree that these are important concepts and that, as David says, we have to be responsible.

    Take this current ‘container of drugs’ situation. It is very clear that the public information released is deliberately intended to deflect the seriousness of the matter, the connections involved, and the weaknesses in the system.
    This is a matter which REQUIRES serious public debate and action – instead, we are told that the matter is ‘sub judice’ and that we must wait (the next 7 years?) while the matter is before the courts- before we can debate and action the weaknesses.

    This is nonsense.

    Sub judice is just a Latin term which means “Let the masses shut their ??sses while we the all-knowing clique, determine our preferred options for ‘justice’”.

    Bush Tea is not interested in the theoretical importance of the concept – I am dealing with the practical reality in Barbados.
    What sub judice what??!!

  20. ac Avatar
    ac

    The facts of the case is the substance of the case and not what a social commentator has to say. Jurys are hand pick by the courts and are evaluated about what the know about the case before they are picked to serve. So this nonsense about social commentators influence on the jury pool is hogwash . THe criminal has more rights than the victim and the court goes to every extreme to see that it is carried out. Think this is self serving only to those in power who might find themselves in a similar situation in the future. Why would I worry what a social commentator have to say if the facts of the case is brought before the court and not innuendo. The facts is what would find a person guilty or innoncent not what Joe the plumber thinks he saw.

  21. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    This has nothing to do with Justice. It is all about muzzling the Barbadian population. What is at work here is cesorship of the worst kind. David you are making a big mistake supporting a corrupt fellow like leacock. Men like leacock are part of the problem not part of the solution and you of all people should know that. The blogs are the last resort of the voiceless in this society and you are encouraging darwin and leacock to shut them down. How is this going to help?
    He used Sgt. Paul Vaughn and other dirty policemen to do his dirty work, let him address that. Sgt. Paul vaughn was charged with taking $56,500.00 in bribes from a pirate DVD seller. The charges were dropped because corrupt Sgt. Paul vaughn does dirty deals for Charles Leacock. So you scratch my back and when your time comes I will scratch your back. That is what these people are trying to protect. It has nothing to do with justice. It has more to do with INJUSTICE. Don’t be fooled david.

  22. David Avatar
    David

    @Barbadian

    You need to reread the point being made. Nobody is muzzling BU, we are simply saying we* have to write responsibly in certain circumstances to ensure that we don’t compromise the same justice system we are calling for.

  23. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    “Even in high profile and emotive cases, BU has been extremely careful to refer to anyone not convicted as accused”

    But David, that is precisely what they are…accused persons.

  24. David Avatar
    David

    @Jeff

    BU has always felt comfortable referring to such persons as suspects.

  25. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    Lt. Col. Williams Base Commanding Officer of CFB Trenton the most important military base in Cananda has been arrested and charged with Murder, Rape, Burgulary, Assault, Theft and a few more serious crimes. He was one of the most top ranking military people in all Canada. His branch was the Air Force. He flew Primer Ministers and Presidents of the World.
    Last night I was able to watch an hour long programme on CBC in Canada at prime time dealing with this case. Interviews of victims of Lt. Col. Williams crimes including friends and relatives of the people he murdered. Neighbors of Lt. Col Williams spoke about him, former military men who knew him a biography of him and all of this while the case is making it’s way through the Court System of Canada, a first World country. What would you call such a case?
    Are you telling me that the people of Cananda are very sensible so they can be given this information while legal procedings are taking place, while we here in Barbados are so dumb and stupid that such revelations would affect “justice”? …..and you are buying that david? We see these type of programmes on American Tv all the time and it has no effect on Jury selection or the outcome the trials.

  26. David Avatar
    David

    @Barbadian

    Do you agree that the law in Barbados explains what sub judice is and hence there should be no problem interpreting such?

    Do you accept that law has context and there to compare Canada to 2×3 Barbados is unfair?

    Having highlighted the above BU is sympathetic to Bush Tea’s position.

  27. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    No problem, David. Just so you understand that before they are charged they are “suspects”; after charge, they are “accused”, and so they remain until conviction or acquittal.

  28. David Avatar
    David

    @Jeff

    Thanks, we are on the same page.

  29. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ David

    CASE IN POINT!!

    Page 7 of today’s Saturday sun details a case where a five year-old gun and ammunition case has been discontinued in the # 5 court.
    A man was charged with possession and assaulting a policeman.

    The case was discontinued without a word of evidence because ,(GET THIS) – the prosecutor said that he was having ‘some challenges’…..
    End of matter!!

    And Amused and Jeff Cumberbatch calls this justice!!?

    What challenges?
    … did the gun and ammunition disappear?
    … The assaulted constable changed his story?
    … The prosecutor having a bad day?
    … The accused found God?

    Typical Barbadian ‘Justice’!
    …what do you want to bet that somebody paid somebody something?
    ….and the judge ask not a question! Does Justice not REQUIRE that the public (on whose behalf this man was accused and prosecuted) be told the circumstances – even if only to be in a position to fully forgive the man if indeed he is innocent?
    ….and more importantly to remove suspicions of underhand hanky panky which undermines Justice???

    WTF!!

  30. anthony Avatar
    anthony

    Why should they have to wait 5 years to go to trail for this. there should be speedy and efficient use of the justice system but i guess it always be the same old thing here. wait forever for a trail.

  31. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    @Barbadian,
    I was just about to point out that in Canada cases before the court are published unless it involves children whose identity must be protected.

    From the time a crime occurs it is published. Photos of the accused are published, the locations of the crimes are published etc.

    Barbados seems to be different and does not accept the tenet that “the public has a right to know”.

  32. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    @anthony,
    They are here arguing about “sub judice” but we are not discussing why all these well educated Bajans can’t improve the Justice system to even a reasonable level.
    5 years to wait for a legal “process” is absurd.

    Now that I think of it, could a Lawyer could manipulate a “situation” where his client spends 5 years in jail and the case is then dropped?
    Why? The client would not have a record if the case is dropped.
    Yes I am devious sometimes.

  33. Bonny Peppa Avatar
    Bonny Peppa

    Barbadian
    Re: Sgt. Paul Vaughn
    And he was such a pleasant,decent young man growing up. de kind evry motha feels proud of.
    But dah is wah he get charge wid? wuhloss, wuhlosss.

    But Sgt. Bowen gone back ta work yet? dis is ova 3 or mo years now. he did get suspend fa embarrassing de commish in de Nation.

  34. anthony Avatar
    anthony

    @ hants

    i think you forgetting the retaining fee + courts fee for the lawyer also

  35. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    I have not yet read the report of the trial, but how do you know, BT, that the judge did not ask what the “challenges” were?

  36. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ Jeff
    She may well have done so informally.
    ….. but from the report that the matter was dropped ‘without a word of evidence being led’, a simple bushman would be led to conclude that no such discussion was entered on the record.
    Officially then at least, no questions were asked.

  37. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    Point taken, although no evidence being led means that no one was put on the stand…the conversation between the Bench and the prosecution is not evidence.

  38. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    In Barbados the public has no right to know or only to know what they want them to know.
    Veoma Ali from VOB beat and broke the foot of the Clarke woman but somehow the files can not be found. Roy Morris raped a little Intern girl at the Nation, nothing came out of the case. Now he opened a newspaper, I feel sorry for the women working for him. These are the kinds of things that they want to keep quiet.

  39. Barbadian Avatar
    Barbadian

    http://barbadosfreepress.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/typical-barbados-justice-system-follies-another-police-file-missing-at-director-of-public-prosecutions-office/

  40. Bonny Peppa Avatar
    Bonny Peppa

    Barbadian
    Roy Morris? heh-heyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.

  41. David Avatar
    David

    Interesting to listen to Tony Marshall’s response to a caller last week who expressed concern at the slow pace which decisions are being handed down in the courts of Barbados. Tony Marshall did his best to play down the man’s concerns.

    It reminded us that Tony Marshall has occupied the highest position in the ‘Lodge’ which has many of our lawyers/judges as members. Enough said!

  42. Amused Avatar
    Amused

    @David. Interesting simply because Tony Marshall clearly has no concept of what is going on in the courts. The total and complete mess they are in. The fact that counsel have, in certain cases, startes suing judges and the Registrar. This is the legacy of Owen Arthur’s chief justice, David Simmons. While the mess at the Registy is directly attributable to Marie Simmons and her (not by her) nepotistically appointed successors.

    So I listened astonished to Tony Marshall and wondered which planet he is living on. Or is it that he thinks that ordinary Bajans have no right to question the complete break-down of a justice system that they are paying to maintain with their taxes? He who pays the piper calls the tune – this is an adage that politicians and all those in public life would do well to learn – QUICKLY!!!

    The Lodge? Well, I am not a member myself. However, many people in the legal profession are and traditionally have been. I cannot speak to Tony Marshall’s motives in trying to SEE OFF an issue of urgent national concern. What I can say is that I know many counsel who are members of the Lodge and if Tony’s comments were made in an effort to protect Lodge members, they would be furious. For them, the law and justice supercedes everything else.

  43. David Avatar
    David

    @Amused

    It has become obvious the indecent haste with which callers who query the efficiency of our judiciary are rushed off the callin programs, especially VOB. How can civil society express its outrage if the media tries to suppress everything whether by accident or design?

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading