We are in the business of recycling crime in TT. From the streets to the courts and back to the streets.

A kangaroo court is better than no court at all. If we continue to release felons and murderers from our prisons, on reversals from the Privy Council and our Appeal Court at the rate we are going, vigilante justice would be our ultimate recourse. A well-known, very vocal senator spoke out very strongly against custodial sentences and first-time offenders and those through the incompetence of the judicial system who were made to over stay their time in our prisons. As well meaning as the senator’s advocacy was, her utterance precipitated a “run” on our prisons. It would be fair to say — it opened a can of worms. Prisoners’ rights consequently, became the main focus of our judges and magistrates, while the rights of victims became a non-issue. Prisoners are now being allowed to walk out of prison, unto our streets, on the flimsiest legal technicality, on decisions from our Appeal Court and the Privy Council. (In my view the latter should be replaced by the CVC.) Our Police Service, already beset with low morale and alleged incompetence, is burdened even further by the decisions handed down by the respective courts. This type of partiality favouring the criminal lends fuel to our losing battle in our fight against crime in our society, not the belaboured deportees.

There is nothing that a magistrate or judge fears more than a reversal to his decision, from the Appeal Court or Privy Council. This gives rise to a play-it-safe, toe-the-line course of action that influences the decisions of our magistrates and judges. Along with other reasons, if expressed, these are sure to bring out displaced rancour. There are prisoners being released from prison who are now awarded large sums of money for excessive incarceration in our prisons which is a drain on our treasury. We find ourselves rewarding people who have committed crimes by having to turn around and compensate them for being wards of our prison system. We no longer “lock up,” and throw away the key. When a judge or magistrate makes a decision it is premised on the evidence put before the court and all applicable legal constraints. As a consequence, whenever there is a reversal, resulting in an acquittal or new trial the presiding magistrate or judge should be held accountable. In the lower court, the magistrate has the last say; while in the High Court the decision is the sole purview of the judge’s responsibility to instruct the members of the jury in arriving at an acceptable verdict, according to the law.

Having said my piece as a lay-man, I now set out to point out, what I view to be tomfoolery in TT: A burglar with 18 previous convictions, charged with 18 more was sentenced to 118 years in prison. With the presiding magistrate knowing fully well that the maximum stay in prison for the charge of house-breaking for which the defendant was charged was eight years. So why go through the charade, of adding 110 years to the sentence when a reprimand and discharge was all that was necessary. A man wanted on two murder charges who was recently freed by the court on another murder charge, was shot by members of the Inter-Agency (Army-Police unit) task force. On affecting a search on the assailant, who fired upon the officers, two fully loaded .375 Magnum revolvers which were allegedly stolen from security officers over the past few weeks were found on him. A characterisation of the violent life style of the assailant, who was recently “set free” from prison. Another pariah set loose on the society, through legal technicalities with a licence to seek and destroy. A mission with the full sanction of our court.

We are well on our way to becoming a country, where vigilante-justice may be the only option left to us — courtesy of our courts and “hallowed” Privy Council. This is a classic case for law students, and for the legal history books: Two drug pushers were caught with the largest quantity of illegal drugs ever reported in TT, with the street value in the double-digit millions. The matter was tried by a judge, who dismissed the case, solely on a discrepancy between the conflicting evidence given during the trial that involved the weight of the drugs during the trial. A re-trial was ordered by the Appeal Court at which time, one of the defendants a national of Venezuela “skipped” the country, and has not been seen or heard of since. I would be remiss, if I fail to address the malignancy that is rampant in the Police Service which is police brutality.

A recent judge’s order demanded that the State pay $130,000 to a prisoner who was allegedly brutally beaten by policemen while in custody. Government is not a business, the over-taxed, financially burdened tax-payers are the ones who are forced to pick up the “tab”, not the government. The government’s treasury is responsible for the disbursement of these funds which are our tax dollars. Let the policemen involved in this depraved act, pay this compensation through a lien on their pension and gratuity. This would go a long way in curtailing this gross police misconduct of police brutality when dealing with members of the public. Mark my word, just try it and see the results.

ULRIC GUY
Point Fortin