I’ll leave this for a significant while after today’s offering. However, recent successes by the Guyana Police Force, both in eliminating and apprehending suspects and confirmed criminals influenced me to recycle just a few relevant thoughts which tend to upset me.
Without being profound, the issues derive from our concept of justice, the body of law our judicial officials use to determine fair-play, innocence, guilt and generally that concept or principle we refer to, sometimes airily as “justice”. By necessary indispensable association, we must also reflect on the commitment and “duty” of legal advocates, defence counsel. And yes, the ability – or incompetence – of prosecutors.
Far from being “learned” or qualified, I have to bring my (hopefully) intelligent layman’s perspective on the matter – my central point being that, within the legal system of trials in court, prosecution and defence then judgment by the arbitrator, too many guilty persons go free. The reasons, I feel, reside in better defence practitioners than prosecutors; occasional sloppy police work, irregular goings–on at Police Stations and in Courtroom offices and the corrupt use of “big bucks”. Besides true justice being raped, I always grieve for the brave honest policemen whose lives were on the line and/or whose investigative work was not properly prosecuted.
Thus it unfolds, much, much too often, that according to Law and better advocacy and better defence use of that law and its proceedings, many who actually commit crimes are found not guilty. When all know, in reality that “they did it”. They are freed but not at all innocent! That’s why I cringed the other day when the male rapist – relative was let go when all were convinced he had savagely violated his niece. But that is our inherited and current courtroom system of justice.
My point is this: you really don’t need to be learned in the law as counsel, magistrates and judges are to realize that the onus is for the plaintiff and prosecutor to prove, for magistrate’s, judge’s and jury’s satisfaction, in law, that the bandits you saw killing your daughter really did kill her. Otherwise? He will always be the alleged killer whilst she remains more than allegedly dead! What a pity.
How they go free….
Legal reasons abound for reasonably good cases and poorly – prosecuted ones falling apart. This is what I discovered and recorded many, many years ago.
“Consider the high incidence of guilty accused happily falling through our justice system because of prosecutorial deficiencies or what the law allows judges and magistrates to decide. In short, a few examples of how the obviously guilty go free.
“An attorney, weeks ago, questioned the composition and system of juries, a letter-writer to the press raised again the strategies of prominent `flamboyant and influential lawyers’ vis-à-vis hard evidence presented; scheduling of cases and the long delays in delivering written judgments. Often, cases are dismissed because `not enough evidence to convict’ was offered to the court. A few days ago charges of causing grievous bodily harm were dismissed because the magistrate found that `all the police witnesses differed materially from one another’.
“Just recently a judge invoked certain sections of the Criminal Law Procedure Act to rule in favour of the defence because of `unreasonable delay’. The section provides for proceedings of that nature to be stayed when the delay is due to inability of the prosecution to make witnesses available.
Often, charges are withdrawn when witnesses are out of the jurisdiction, unavailable, or files and evidence go missing.
“Three weeks ago the Guyana Court of Appeal freed a manslaughter convict because it found that the judge’s summing up lacked `judicial captaincy’. The expert defence advocated got the highest court to agree on many shortcomings in the trial judge’s summing up including `material non-direction’, lack of directions regarding a witness’ `interest to serve’ and guidance not given with respect to self-defence regardless of the force used.
“My usual point is: are not our prosecutors as capable as the defence? Our Westernized system of justice decides that whether an accused committed a crime or not, all criteria of law to convict must be fully met for the aggrieved to get justice. Crooks go free because the defence is better (prepared) than the prosecution. Or the judge did a poor job!
“From elections petitions to granting injunctions, the judiciary has powers that can decide the future of our society, our progress or stultification. Right or wrong becomes the subject of what the law determines. What’s the alternative? I should perhaps also study Islamic law before I die?”
Criminal connections?
I’d better leave this for another time – if no one follows it up.
I’m no fan at all of Mark Benschop. But over the past five years I used to enquire about Phillip Bynoe, who, good sources would reveal, was not really living with “animals”. To me it was not fair to Benschop, if they were not really seeking out his co-accused. Oh well…
I hope to return to the connections – real or perceived: Gibson- Hinckson; Party official – village bandit-relative; Government functionary – corrupt businessman with-criminal convictions; police officer- overseas baron. Journalist –bandit organizer. Look, let me consider this treatment…
Reflect…
1*) I read almost everything on the local sugar industry. So I am reflecting on Ravi Dev’s contention that we must look to the Guysuco board, the Booker – Tate management, the World Bank and the government for fundamental answers to the industry’s failures. Not only the workers!
2*) Minister Henry Jeffrey would make an ideal Ambassador to Brasilia, that high–profile mission in an emergent Brazil.
3*) My Two Friday Wishes: A) that I can avoid Regent Street’s pavement vending and (b) that businesses find means to give their workers year-end bonuses and food and medical packages.
‘Til next week!
