BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – IN less than one month, there have been two shooting incidents on Nevis that involved members of the Royal St. Christopher and Nevis Police Force, which resulted in injuries to a 55-year-old security guard and the death of a teenager, respectively.
Although the police had issued press releases and held a press conference with the aim of informing the public about the incidents and what steps have so far been taken, many questions have been raised and some citizens are of the view that the High Command has been tight-lipped on the incidents and they are dissatisfied with some of the explanations given.
Shooting at Pinney’s Beach
The first incident occurred on Saturday (Sept. 19) when Steadroy ‘Seamoss’ Sutton, who is employed as a security guard at the Turtle Times Restaurant on Pinney’s Beach, was shot twice while carrying out his duties. He had sustained wounds to his groin and lower back.
A journalist of the St. Kitts-Nevis Observer had reportedly spoken to Sutton, who claimed that at about 2:00 a.m. on the day in question, while on duty clad in his security uniform, he had observed a person walking from the direction of Sunshine Bar and Restaurant towards the Turtle Times Restaurant and started urinating in the yard of the establishment.
The media house further reported that Sutton had walked towards the restaurant in order to call the police when the person opened fire in his direction, hitting him once.
“I walked up the building to take up my book to call an officer to report the guy. The person found me right at the building and said he wanted to make the call himself. He then took off the gun and shot me,” the guard recounted to the Observer’s reporter.
Sutton also reportedly told the reporter that after the first shot, he jumped on the person but released his hold on him after realising the wound was bleeding.
“I went back and as I turned around, he shot me in the back. I ran to the bandstand and interrupted the vocalist," adding that the vocalist called the police and on the arrival of an officer he was taken to the hospital at 3:00 a.m.
Shooting at Enrique Bar
The second incident occurred on Saturday (Oct. 17) at Enrique Bar, which is situated in Cedar Trees, Charlestown, Nevis, a short distance from the Charlestown Police Station.
This incident resulted in the death of 17-year-old Philo Wallace of Hamilton Village and the wounding of a police officer.
Speaking to the media at a press conference held at the Charlestown Police Station on Monday (Oct. 19), Acting Commissioner Liburd said: “...The facts known to date are at approximately 3:45 a.m. on Saturday, an altercation took place between several people, including a police officer, at Enrique Bar located in Cedar Trees, Charlestown, Nevis. During this incident, the officer discharged his firearm. The 17-year-old male was fatally wounded. The officer received a head injury. The deceased was taken to the Alexandra Hospital by a private vehicle and was later pronounced dead at 4:10 a.m.”
High Command Explanation/Decision
In relation to the shooting of the security guard, Liburd said the officer was at first assigned to desk duties and, following investigations, he was subsequently charged on Wednesday (Sept. 30) “with two disciplinary offences regarding the use of his firearm”.
The matter was again raised at the press conference and the Acting Commissioner told reporters that as a result of an investigation conducted by the Office of Professional Standards, the officer was suspended from the Force and would be in receipt of half his salary on a monthly basis until the matter ends.
Considering the severity of the matter, a questioned on who would determine that the officer be charged criminally if found responsible for the alleged offence was answered by Liburd.
“I do not want the public to think that a disciplinary charge ends at a particular investigation on the criminal side. The Office of Professional Standards, they will do certain recommendation, and they only recommend. It would be reviewed by a Senior Officer, who will not be the Trial Officer, and give certain directives As a result of that, a certain course of action will be taken.”
“In terms of the criminal,” he added, “that will have to be investigated by the Violent Crimes Unit and that will go through the hands of the Senior Officer and eventually reaches the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. So the call for that is not just an individual making it.”
A number of questions were also asked relative to the shooting of Wallace, including: “Will the investigation be conducted using the internal mechanism of the Force or will a special prosecutor/investigator be brought in?”
In response, Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) with responsibility for Crime, Ian Queeley said, “The investigations are well underway and this particular point in time there is no external mechanism. The Violent Crimes Unit of the St. Kitts Nevis Police Force has been activated along with the Office of Professional Standards. So we have concurrent investigations happening at this time.”
And responding to if the police had heard or seen anything that suggested deadly force was used in the shooting of the teen, ACP Vaughan Henderson, who is responsible for Operations, said: “At this point in our investigation the matter is still sub judice. The matter is still very early and still under investigation. And to be fair to both sides, we are not in a position to say whether or not the shoot with deadly force that was used is justified. As the investigation goes on, we are hoping that we will give further information and updates to the general public.”
There were two questions which answers had caused many people to comment that the police were “tight-lipped” on the matter.
One was: “Is there any evidence that the guy who received injury to his head was struck by the guy who got killed?” And the other was: “Did that officer had the rank to carry a weapon while off-duty?” or similar words.
Both questions were answered by ACP Queeley.
“Firstly, the ranks and issuance of firearms...there are regulations. I indicated earlier certain persons are allowed to carry firearms. For the purposes of this, I cannot say what unit or persons would be entitled to carry firearms. That would be compromising to say.
“In relation to the other question, that matter is too early to give any feedback to. Suffice to say, that is only an allegation. And if it’s an allegation, investigations that we are ongoing we are hoping to extract from all potential witnesses what they would have seen or heard so as to determine whether or not that was true.”
Queeley was also taken to task in explaining the difference between criminal and disciplinary charges.
He said: “Matters that are criminal are triable before a court. Matters that are disciplinary are triable by the trial officers within the organisation who are assigned as Trial Officers. So, criminal charges can and will be laid against somebody if they appearing before a magistrate or in the High Court or whoever, and the standard...is different in both instances. And as it relates to disciplinary, the Police Force is a disciplined body and any action contrary to discipline can receive internal sanctions.”
In an effort to have a clearer picture of what Queeley meant, a media representative asked: “That means that whatever offence an officer commits will it be treated as a disciplinary offence?”
In response, the ACP said, “You heard me said earlier that there are two parallel investigations that are being conducted; one by the Office of Professional Standards and one by the Violent Crimes Unit. If the investigation reveals criminality, that particular file would be sent to the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions who will advise further. As it relates to the discipline, once that investigation is completed and breaches of discipline are identified, then those persons are charged disciplinary and brought before a Trial Officer within the organisation.”
Agree to Disagree
While this writer is in agreement with the High Command that an internal disciplinary committee should award punishment to members of the Force whenever they violate Standing Orders, incidents regarding civilians, such as the two in question, should involve trial officers not autonomous to the Force. In other words, the gravity of the situation should determine the intended action.
Furthermore, like the military, ‘squaddies’ watch each other’s back. Which civilian could say with certainty that all evidence unearthed by a team of investigators from the Police Force would be presented against one of their own before a magistrate or a judge? Even if they do, it would be perceived by many that some incriminating details were absent.
On one hand, there are known cases, worldwide, where Trial Officers victimised their subordinates because they saw them as threats to their position; not only because they were young, but also educated and very intelligent. And on the other hand, in protection of the image of the organisation, be it military or para-military, some Trial Officers do not disclose all the facts to the public. They only provide those that justify the officers’ actions.
At this point in time when the Police Force is desperately trying to mend the broken fences between its members and the public, it would not be wise for them to investigate their own, especially in the shooting-death of Wallace. There is a lack of trust and confidence in the police and the public would not be satisfied with their findings.
Shortly after the incident took place, there have been debates on talk show programmes and discussions in bars as well on the streets and other public places, and the consensus was that an independent body should investigate the matter.
One renowned Attorney-at-Law had opined that if the police should investigate their own, the process would create a high degree of distrust by the public and it would also be biased as well as lacking due process and natural justice.
This writer agrees with them and therefore suggests that the Government should commission an independent body to conduct the investigation. However, this body should comprise three or five capable and competent individuals who are non-nationals not residing in the Federation.
Why non-nationals?
It is a known fact that St. Kitts and Nevis is a small country and most of its nationals are either related or are close friends. Therefore, selecting an independent body from among nationals could be similar to that of the investigation being done by the police.
This writer would therefore like to suggest that the independent body not only meticulously scrutinise the findings of the investigations conducted by the Violent Crimes Unit and the Office of Professional Standards, but also question all those who were investigated in order to demonstrate transparency; for justice should not only be done, it must be seen to be done.
In the recent past, a member of the High Command had stated that whenever an officer is disciplined for an offence, the public is normally notified of the punishment meted out to him or her and that records are there to substantiate that fact.
But what are the findings of the coroner’s inquest into the death of Lodge Villager Clive ‘Mac’ Lake, who was shot by a police officer on the premises of the Chief Fire Officer of the St. Kitts and Nevis Fire and Rescue Services on Tuesday, March 24, 2009? Was there an inquest into the death of Winston Callustus ‘Callie’ Browne of New Road Housing Project, who was shot to death by police on Tuesday, January 22, 2013? If yes, were the finding made public?
At the recently-concluded National Consultation on the Economy, a media representative had reminded Dr. Timothy Harris about the two shooting incidents on Nevis and sought his response to the public’s call for an independent investigation.
“That is a matter...of course we will get legal advice when we meet in Cabinet today or hopefully on the next occasion. The Attorney-General would advise us in terms of what can be done legally. We have no objection and I think...the Cabinet would have no objection to a transparent process that brings to the public the truth about those circumstances. And so we have no objection in principle to that.
“I am sure that the High Command of the Police themselves would not object to a transparent and independent investigation, because that can help the process and that could bring clarity both to their role and their future actions in terms of training and in terms of monitoring, in terms of who we give firearms to and in terms of their preparation,” Dr. Harris said.
He also responded to the issue of trust that the public does not have in the Police Force.
“I understand that concern and certainly we would want to bring trust and goodwill...that as mechanisms and opportunities that would lead us down that road. The Government certainly would want to embrace it. We want to embrace it and we want to ensure that we do nothing to destabilise the national security of the country...”
The Prime Minister however emphasised that his Government wants a clean Police Force; a Force that is performing competently, honestly and professionally, and that his Administration would stand by that and give support to whatever initiative would help it to achieve that goal.
Since the press conference in Nevis, no word was had from the police as the public patiently awaits results of the investigations.
