The police yesterday said that the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has recommended three charges against APNU+AFC MP David Patterson including exposure of his genitals.
The advice came less than a day after the police submitted the file to the DPP’s Chambers.
According to the police, the DPP recommended that Patterson be charged with:
1. Exposure of the genitals contrary to Section 28 2 (a) of the Sexual Offences Act Chapter 8:03.
2. Using obscene language contrary to Section 141 (b) of the Summary Jurisdiction (Offences) Act Chapter 8:02 and
3. Provoking a breach of the Peace contrary to Section 141 (a) of the Summary Jurisdiction (Offences) Act Chapter 8:02
On Wednesday, Patterson who was wanted by the police for questioning in relation to an allegation of exposure of his genitals surrendered to the police in Region 4 A in the company of his attorney and was placed on $200,000 bail.
At the police station, Patterson was told of the allegation made against him by a member of the public and was arrested.
Patterson’s attorney Ronald J Daniels on Wednesday raised concerns about the bail decision and the handling of his client.
On his Facebook page, Daniels said that he attended the station with Patterson just after 2:00 p.m. and the interview concluded at 4:00 pm. He said that the interview was conducted by an investigating rank who is one of the very senior and decorated police officers who he has a good measure of respect for.
Daniels said that the rank reported to his senior at the close of the interview for instructions on next step. The attorney said that there was a series of back and forth phone calls relative to Patterson. Daniels said that the rank’s senior instructed that Patterson be placed on bail in the sum of $200,000. Daniels said that he inquired who the senior was and engaged him. The attorney said that he told the senior that the quantum of bail is “gravely out of proportion to the circumstances”. Daniels said that it was essentially an allegation of indecent exposure and obscene language made against Patterson by the proprietor of a business place. Daniels said that no court with a sense of justice and an appreciation of the chief consideration in granting bail would put the MP on bail in this sum.
He said that the chief consideration in granting bail is whether the accused person would submit himself to the jurisdiction of the police or the court once the accused is before the court. Other considerations are whether the accused has a criminal past, is likely to interfere with witnesses, is a flight risk, whether the offence is of a serious nature, etc.
“These are by no means serious offences on the graduating scale of offences. MP Patterson submitted himself to the police without a conventional arrest having to be effected. This in itself is a demonstration of his readiness to submit himself to the jurisdiction of the police and by extension that of the court. He is a well-known person and can hardly flee undetected. The police know where he lives. And he does not have a criminal past. The court is a higher authority than the police with respect to, among other things, the granting of bail. And I dare say that no reasonable court should or would grant someone in similar circumstances bail in a sum exceeding $40,000. Anything above this is potentially troubling; and $200,000, as requested by the police, is simply outrageous”, Daniels said.
Daniels added that the senior officer told him “that he is working with instructions from above him, and agreed to relay my concerns up the ladder. He subsequently told the investigating rank that the sum of the bail remains unchanged”, Daniels said.
The attorney said that Patterson also inquired from the police whether he could be accompanied by the police to secure the monies for his bail at a location not far from the police station. Instructions came from higher up that no such courtesies would be granted, Daniels added.
“This is what our criminal justice system looks like. And I do not exaggerate when I say this is a mild exhibition of it. One does not have to search too deep to construct real imaginations of the plight of those who have neither the power of resource, status or connections. And woe to him who has neither of these plus lacks education. Whatever the motivations are relative to MP Patterson, it is plain to see that they are not inspired by a sense of justice”, Daniels asserted.
