In a blog dated 19 October 2019 Barbados Underground highlighted that legendary local sleuth Ashford ‘Rap Brown’ Jones was snared on an ammunition charge. RAP BROWN SNARED Approaching 3 years later the 75 year old Rap Brown Jones has been successful having his case postponed again until 31 January 2023. The blogmaster will reserve the…
In a blog dated 19 October 2019 Barbados Underground highlighted that legendary local sleuth Ashford ‘Rap Brown’ Jones was snared on an ammunition charge.
Approaching 3 years later the 75 year old Rap Brown Jones has been successful having his case postponed again until 31 January 2023. The blogmaster will reserve the obvious comment.
What about the case with Annell
@Colin
That case is stuck in the system since 2017? A clear case of manipulation?
http://barbados.loopnews.com/content/police-superintendent-remanded-ammunition-charges
Isn’t Rap Browne dead?
Is he dead? Good f this is the case why did the court reschedule the case?
@ David
Ironically, Jones and I spoke with each other last week Thursday and I wondered what was the status of his case.
Saw him in Oistins on Monday as well.
But, as far as I know, he is not dead.
Thanks Artax. You read the wildest things here sometimes.
Would be even wilder if in addittion to having the case rescheduled, he was dead and drawing a pension.
Thanks Artax. You read the wildest things here sometimes.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
iT’S ONLY TRUE IF YOUR BUDDY ENUFF SAIDS IT
@ “In a blog dated 19 October 2019 Barbados Underground highlighted that legendary local sleuth Ashford ‘Rap Brown’ Jones was snared on an ammunition charge.”
Snared David?
Why snared?
What does it mean to snare somebody?
capture an enemy stronghold trap, snare, entrap, ensnare imply seizing by some device that holds the one caught at the mercy of the captor. trap and snare apply more commonly to physical seizing.
Words matter.
The blogmaster used the word deliberately.
Ex-murder accused to get more money from state for breach of Constitutional rights
Article by
Fernella Wedderburn
Published on
August 19, 2022Former murder accused Pedro Deroy Ellis has won another case against the State for breach of his constitutional rights, just over a month after the court awarded him $75 000 for wrongful detention.
However, the amount he will receive in damages will not be known for another two weeks.
Justice Cecil McCarthy, who heard the case, has instructed lawyers for both sides to file submissions on the quantum of the award by August 24, following which he is expected to hand down a written decision on August 30.
In May 2013, Ellis was arrested for the May 5, 2013 murder of Antonio Harewood and was remanded to prison. In February 2014, he made his first of many bail applications before the High Court.
However, all his attempts were unsuccessful. One such application was made in December 2016, a decision he subsequently took before the Court of Appeal. He filed the notice of appeal in March 2017 and the matter was heard by a panel of judges in March 2018. The decision was handed down a year later.
Ellis’ attorneys, Queen’s Counsel Larry Smith along with Jamila Smith, who represented him from the inception of his case, took the matter before the civil court claiming that his right to bail and right to a fair trial in a reasonable time were breached.
The legal team also made submissions for the court to award damages for those breaches.
In handing down his oral decision on Wednesday Justice McCarthy said the court was of the view that Section 13 (3) (b) of the Constitution had indeed been breached.
He made “a declaration that the claimant’s right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time pursuant to Section 18 (1) of the Constitution is breached. A declaration that the claimant’s right to be released on bail pursuant to Section 13 (3) (b) of the Constitution was breached; and an order that the claimant is entitled to damages for breach of Section 18 (1) and 13 (3) of the Constitution.”
“The damages awarded to the claimant will be set out in the written judgment. The court will award costs for two counsel with respect to the proceedings,” added the judge.
Just last month, the State was ordered to pay Ellis for unlawfully detaining him for 18 days.
Madam Justice Shona Griffith awarded him $50 000 in non-pecuniary damages and $25 000 in vindicatory damages, on the grounds that his constitutional rights had been breached when he was remanded to prison after being found not guilty of murder.
That matter revolved around Ellis being remanded to prison pending a decision on whether he would face a retrial after a 12-member jury found him not guilty of Harewood’s murder but could not reach a verdict on manslaughter.
Source: Nation
Our courts backed with too many waste of court time cases because of too stringent laws.
Once you have licensed firearms, you should be allowed to have any amount of ammunition for them in your possession.
100 rounds will run out in no time in a zombie apocalypse or after a major natural disaster when society has a tendency to breakdown.
Charges should only be brought if the ammo does not match your licensed firearms, is not stored in a secured location or is sold to someone not licensed for guns holding the same ammo.
@CA
The focus by the blogmaster in these kinds of matters is about the length of time it stays in the system because of obvious case file manipulation.
“100 rounds will run out in no time in a zombie apocalypse or after a major natural disaster when society has a tendency to breakdown.”
I have no idea how many rounds are too many for a person to have, B
but there must be number where an individual can become a threat to the state. Unlicensed guns can use the same ammunition as a licensed one.
I think having 10,000 rounds to defend against a zombie apocalypse or a hurricane may be too much of a stretch. Like the Kraken, it may never happen.
@David
Why is it in the court system in the first place? Any time spent on this is wasted court time that could have been spent on speeding other cases through the court.
I know nothing about this case but my assumption would be that 100 rounds is his personal stock. It should only be a court case if he was selling ammo or had ammo that didn’t fit his gun.
Our system is clogged because of the numerous badly drafted laws aimed at filling the government coffers with fines instead of deterring future crimes.
@TheOGazerts
You need to watch and read more society collapse movies and history. The Kraken is not so far fetched. It can happen here very fast if we were to be cutoff from the imports for a week or 2. Look at what happened recently in Sri Lanka. Ammo is not only for shooting, it becomes valuable after collapse of society disasters to barter with for food, fuel, tools, etc. where traditional currency has limited value.
To maintain true firearm proficiency and not be a danger to yourself and others, you must train on a regular basis and that takes bullets.
There is no quantity of ammo a single person can have in their possession for their own guns that can be a threat to the state. They will need other people of like mind and the means to pose a threat.
A person with legal huge ammunition stocks will more be a help to the state since the same state will approach them if their own stock runs low or gets taken over during a natural disaster or invasion.
@ CA
Of course you are correct – except that some upper limit is not unreasonable, to ensure that excesses by some idiots can be policed.
When a police officer develops the kind of PUBLIC reputation that some special ones do, only a moron would expect them to walk around in Barbados unarmed – when it seems that EVERY little punk can now walk / drive around armed to the teeth, while exacting their own brand of capital punishment.
Rather than value the fact that we have such unique, committed LAW enforcers, we have a set of officials who actually seem to target them with offenses that are actually quite petty – like having ‘excess’ ammunition, over what they are licensed to have.
That should be an internal disciplinary matter.
So, thanks to our ‘Criminal lawyers’, (pun intended), rather than have pre-emptive random searches of KNOWN criminal characters, we seem to have targeted otherwise law-abiding individuals, who the authorities KNOW to have licensed firearms,(because THEY vetted them and approved these) and who could VERY likely have a few more than the silly number allocated.
A quick internet search shows that a licensed competitive sport shooter for example can easily fire hundreds of rounds in one practice session and that top International olympic shooters routinely fire hundreds of rounds every day as part of their practice routines.
We seem to have everything ass-backwards….
if the amount of ammo Browne had was legal…he would not have been charged for it…
besides he has a reputation that is not at all wholesome…
and should be taken off the streets like any block dude with illegal guns and ammo…..of course they will drag the case out until it disappears….
I deliberately used the figure of 10,000 for a reason. I could have used a larger number. I also mentioned licensed and unlicensed guns.
I was hoping someone would grasp the idea of one man who has a huge legal ammunition stock was storing bullets for others.
He could be supplying those who have illegal firearms (criminals) or even preparation for an uprising. There was talk of people renting guns; these guns need bullets.
Limits are sensible and cautious.
@Bush Tea
A law setting an upper ammo limit may sound good but hurts the law-abiding in practice and seeks to fool the general public who has limited knowledge about the effort it takes to keep guns.
Bullets are not cheap so unless a man is rich or a criminal, they are not going to be able to afford lots of guns or a huge ammo stockpile. The rich and criminals will always have ways and means to get as many as they want and the rest will be limited by what they can afford.
The law needs to be focused on penalizing legal gun owners practising insecure storage of guns and bullets and selling bullets.
@CA
Why should a septuagenarian have that load of ammunition in their possession?
@ David
I can understand the concerns about the length of time Browne’s and other cases have been lagging in the Court system.
CA made the “assumption that 100 rounds is (Browne’s) personal stock,”…… and “There is no quantity of ammo a single person can have in their possession for their own guns that can be a threat to the state.”
Because an individual may have a licensed firearm does not mean he/she can ‘walk ’bout de place’ with any amount of bullets he/she desires.
However, Waru is correct.
“if the amount of ammo Browne had was LEGAL …he WOULD NOT have been CHARGED for it…”
There are businesses in Barbados, such as Carters, that are AUTHORIZED to sell firearms and ammunition.
And, it’s from those businesses persons with licenses to carry firearms, are directed to purchase ‘guns and bullets.’
If, for example, Mike who has a license, decides to purchase or receive ammunition from George who is not authorized to sell ammunition, even though he may also have a ‘license to carry,’ both gentlemen broke the law.
Look at Annel’s case. He was charged for UNLAWFUL POSSESSION of ammunition and five counts of Misconduct and Misuse of Public Trust.
That being a member of the Royal Barbados Police Force, he engaged in willful misconduct on August 31, 2017, by joining the Barbados Rifle and Pistol Association, purchasing 100 rounds of ammunition and leaving the Waterford range WITHOUT EXPELLING it.
@Artax
Good comment.
@ David
Why should a septuagenarian have that load of ammunition in their possession?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Boss, when you have a s much money as CA, and everyone knows, you had BETTER let it be known that you are adequately ‘equalized’ … else you could as well buy BOSS bonds with it … cause some little punk will take it from you ‘vi et arms’ …and buy herb… 🙂
@ Artax
Bushie hopes that you are incorrect about Annel’s charge.
Surely there is a more serious charge against him than leaving a gun club with 100 rounds.
As a member of a shooting club, (and the Waterford club obviously is,) 100 rounds of ammunition is nothing. There are multiple reasons (none good) why a member may leave the club not having expelled? …EVEN where it is wrong to do so.
personal emergency…
forgetfulness
distractions..
So this should be an INTERNAL disciplinary matter surely…. by the club officials and / or by the police force if warranted.
But unless there are more serious allegations such as those suggested by CA, this sounds like a case of someone out to get an individual.
..Or perhaps trying to give the impression to the public that action is being taken against serious crime…
@Bush Tea
We are shifting the arguments here. All the actors should have been aware of the rules AND consequences if breaking same. We cannot be ambivalent about rules. There is a way members in the gun community should go about lobbying for change.
All the actors should have been aware of the rules
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
These are internal disciplinary matters!!
Sometimes you should confer with the original David who slew Goliath yuh know… 🙂
Are you aware that it can quite easily be arrange for you to be completely destroyed by unscrupulous people, using any number of ‘rules’ that you either knowingly or unknowingly break… which you should have been aware of…?
Income tax rules
traffic rules
family law rules
financial reporting rules
internet data protection rules..
etc..
Example.. an original bushman claims to be an ‘adopted son of God’ … and his donkey ends up on Calvary
…or some ‘bushy idiot’ post something on your Blog, and suddenly YOU are up Dodds trying to avoid taking showers…
One hopes that you will understand then, ….when Artax opines that you should have known better than to let Bushy (no relation) post shiite…
@Bush Tea
You continue to move the goal posts.
You continue to move the goal posts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Which rule does that break…?
LOL
@Bush tea
License gun holders will have no issue with your posit.
“As a member of a shooting club, (and the Waterford club obviously is,) 100 rounds of ammunition is nothing. There are multiple reasons (none good) why a member may leave the club not having expelled? …EVEN where it is wrong to do so.
personal emergency…
forgetfulness
distractions..”
@ Bushie
Nonsense!!!!
Sometimes you wax shiite eloquently.
Annel was charged according to the law.
The onus is upon him to prove his innocence.
@ Artax
Boss, did you know that “The Law is an ass”..?
Bushie deals with common sense …not donkeys.
Did you ALSO know that….
..It was illegal to change a light bulb unless you’re a licensed electrician in Victoria, Australia.
..You’re not allowed to drive a black car on a Sunday in Denver, Colorado.
..It is unwise (and hence illegal) to attack a bushman…
..and (in the very same vein) it is illegal to leave a shooting club in Brassbados with bullets….
LOL
ha ha ha
Bushie
I don’t know what point are you attempting to make by spewing ‘fabricated illegalities.’
Your response has given credence to François-Marie Arouet’s famous quote that ‘common sense is not so common.’
“LOL……”
“ha ha ha…… oh shirt.” 😃
Here is a next reason why there should be a limit on the number and types of bullets a person can have (even Olympic and competitive events shooters 🙂 )
Without these limits, illegal and legal ammunition will be commingled. A limit let the authorities say “gotchya”
https://barbadostoday.bb/2022/08/20/us-cracks-down-on-firearms-smuggling-to-haiti-caribbean/
Artax
You should EXPECT to NOT understand many of Bushie’s points….
Whereas you operate at the level of the shiite ‘laws’ passed in mock parliaments such as ours here, where for example,
….there is a ‘law’ that stipulates that there MUST be a leader of the Opposition in Parliament…. yet we claim to have a valid Parliament…
…and the SAME ‘law’ stipulates that the Leader of the Opposition MUST be the chairman of the PAC…
…But yet we CANNOT have a PAC…
..You LIKE that ..ent it?
Well not stinking Bushie.!!!
Bushie is aligned to the UNCHANGEABLE LAW of Common Sense….. which is FORCED to rubbish such illogical, NONSENSE, rules – which are to be more to be expected from inexperienced impulsive children such as those in the ‘Youth Parliament’.
@Bush Tea
What is anarchy?
@TheOGazerts,
Bush tea…What is anarchy?
Our destination.
https://barbadostoday.bb/2022/08/20/government-to-set-up-audit-department/
From BT
““Provision was made, with the passing of the Public Finance Management Act, 2019, for the establishment of an Internal Audit Department that would enhance transparency, accountability and good governance with respect to the utilisation of the people of Barbados’ resources.”
Mia has done the double here by appearing to embrace the work of the AG and at the same time sticking a knife in his back. Our guy Ronnie Obama dissected this ‘wicked’ promise, but i feel that he did not take it as far as he should as he would be accused of playing politics. It is a sad thing when presenting hard cold facts can be described as playing politics.
Mia found a clever way to further castrate our AG by creating what I consider will be a fraudulent competing Audit department and at the same time not giving the AG the resources that he needs. This agency will either be a rubber stamp or almost inactive.
Its one statement will be ” The AG is wrong. We looked at that and there were no issues”. Then we will have Lorenzo saying “see what I told you, the AG is a secret D”
Bush Tea August 21, 2022 8:54 AM
Last/last
Okay, Bushman. You win.
Since you (DON’T) operate at the level of the shiite ‘laws,’ and is aligned to the UNCHANGEABLE LAW of Common Sense….. which is FORCED to rubbish such illogical, NONSENSE, rules……”
…… then, I’m SURE if you’re caught being in unlawful possession of ammunition your “donkey” WON’T be charged.
@ Artax
Last/last/last..
Those can easily be ‘planted’…another reason for skepticism…
The truth is that Bushie would not be surprised to see his donkey charged for ‘jaywalking in Queens Park’ – given the history of bushmen.
But wuh?
A real real bushman got his donkey crucified for less…
“But wuh? A real real bushman got his donkey crucified for less…”
Bushie
I promised ‘last/last,’ but, your comments are very amusing.
If you’re referring to Jesus, then, it was prophesied in the Bible that He would’ve been crucified, because His purpose on earth was to die for our sins.
So, whether or not He had done ‘more….. or less,’ the end result would have been the same.
You, on the other hand…… well, that a subject for another discussion.
it was prophesied in the Bible that He would’ve been crucified, because His purpose on earth was to die for our sins.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wait Artax…
You know a very lot about Jesus Bozie!!…. for a economic Guru….
LOL
OK then, since you find Bushies’ comments ‘amusing’, and you have a Bible… What does it mean in Romans 8:29 that :
For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.
~~~~~~~~
..Sure sounds like a lotta ‘bushy?’ people were to follow the ‘firstborn’ ent it??!!
Murduh!!1
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.