Dear Editor,
Past victimisation is indeed the most accurate indicator of future victimisation. This is very true of the unfortunate circumstances surrounding the armed robbery which left Mr Victor Da Silva dead and his long-standing friend wounded, psychologically traumatised and several million dollars poorer ‒ let alone the fact that he too could have been dead. From a security standpoint, when the anatomy of this robbery is re-examined, one sees that a lot had gone wrong from the very beginning.
1. The transporter and custodian of this vital asset in transit were both 72-years-old.
2. Mr Gajadhar by his own admission has become what is known as a ‘habitual victim’ having been robbed on several occasions in the past.
3. The victim had indicated preference for a particular route.
Thinking as a thief would, this state of affairs translates into what could be described as ‘easy pickings.’ While I understand that these two gentlemen were very good friends, the friendship they developed over the years has been shattered by adversity ‒ a long-winded way of saying that there is no place in business for emotion or sentiment.
This all could have been avoided had better judgement prevailed.
The transporting of valuables and assets in transit is about the management of critical risks, which in today’s climate is best handled by professionals.
Yours faithfully,
Clairmont Featherstone
