Tweet
Urgent Review Needed?
PRESS RELEASE
For release Thursday, June 14, 2007
The Minister of National Security said in Parliament yesterday that a review would be done to assess "the appropriateness of the techniques and the standards of professionalism employed by the police investigators, as well as the medical and other professional personnel" in the Bob Woolmer case. The Minister also said that this was necessary because of “the high public interest at home and abroad and the circumstances of the case"
The events in this case which the Minister feels needs to be reviewed, a review to be headed by a former President of the Court of Appeal, and in which he expects to get a report in 6 weeks' time are as follows: the post mortem was conducted 2 days after the death; the family was kept abreast of investigation throughout, and visited by senior police officers; there was a team of between 20 and 30 police assigned to the case; there has been a high level of openness about the investigation; the investigation has been completed in 3 months; toxicology and histology samples were taken and reported on; a full digital photo record of the body prior to post mortem and during the post mortem was taken; there was preservation of exhibits; appropriate x-rays taken; preservation and forensic examination of the scene of death. In addition there has been an extraordinary level of oversight rarely seen in deaths of Jamaicans including:
- 3 overseas forensic pathologists reviewed the post mortem report
- consultation with and review by the Metropolitan Police,
- consultation with Pakistani Police
- the full glare of local and international media:
This is also a case in which the Minister has nothing but praise for the Jamaica Constabulary Force and yet he feels that THIS is a case that demands review!
Mr. Minister, we ask why this case demands review and not the countless other cases of “anonymous" Jamaicans, most of them black and poor, many children included?
Cases in which:
- scenes have not been protected, preserved or examined by forensic units;
- there have been allegations (and evidence) of willful disturbing of the scene and destruction of evidence;
- bodies have been moved from scenes before photographs have been taken, despite clear evidence that the person is dead,
- bodies have been moved from the scene to take them to hospital, but have not been taken immediately to the hospital ,
- families have not been visited by the police (except to attempt to bribe or threaten or intimidate them),
- families have been refused permission to see the bodies of their loved ones for days, because it is a police case
- for example,
o the initial investigating officer on the scene says he saw nothing because it was dark and he had no flashlight (Jason Smith),
o the firearms register comes to court with relevant pages missing, and then is burned up in an unexplained fire at a police station (Janice Allen)
o the clothing of the deceased is being discarded at the time of the post mortem, and is only recovered when the observer indicates an interest in them (Sandra Sewell and Gayon Alcott).
- the post mortems have been done in the dark obscurity of that abominable Spanish Town morgue (the majority of which have no oversight whatsoever including: no observers in attendance; no photographic record of body or post mortem; no review of the post mortem report by other pathologists local or overseas, forensic or otherwise.)
- there have been reports of obstruction and hostility on the part of the pathologists and the police to the presence of and requests for independent observers representing the families of the deceased
- no observers have been available for Jamaican families because of the local pathologists' refusal to get involved, and in those few cases where there have been observers, there have been statements that the post mortems don't meet international standards, and questions are raised about the competence of the pathologists, the inadequacy of the post mortem reports
- post mortems have not been conducted for up to 2 MONTHS and where bodies have decomposed because of the delays, to the point where potential evidence re the cause and circumstances of the death has been lost
Mr. Minister, DO THESE CASES AND CIRCUMSTANCES NOT CALL FOR, NEED or GET ANY ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW? Mr. Minister, did none of these cases and circumstances need an administrative review into "the appropriateness of the techniques and the standards of professionalism employed by the police investigators, as well as the medical and other professional personnel"? Do none of these cases bring "into focus the need for the most up-to-date forensic capabilities and the construction of a new public morgue"? Do none of these families need closure? Do ordinary Jamaicans, out of the media spotlight, not need assurance too?
Mr. Minister, your apparent lack of concern for all these other cases, your lack of action on behalf of Jamaicans to fix appalling problems and circumstances that you were well aware of, and your demand now for a review of a case exceptional in the amount of oversight, review and attention it has ALREADY received, is disturbing in the extreme.
For release Thursday, June 14, 2007
URGENT REVIEW NEEDED?
The Minister of National Security said in Parliament yesterday that a review would be done to assess "the appropriateness of the techniques and the standards of professionalism employed by the police investigators, as well as the medical and other professional personnel" in the Bob Woolmer case. The Minister also said that this was necessary because of “the high public interest at home and abroad and the circumstances of the case"
The events in this case which the Minister feels needs to be reviewed, a review to be headed by a former President of the Court of Appeal, and in which he expects to get a report in 6 weeks' time are as follows: the post mortem was conducted 2 days after the death; the family was kept abreast of investigation throughout, and visited by senior police officers; there was a team of between 20 and 30 police assigned to the case; there has been a high level of openness about the investigation; the investigation has been completed in 3 months; toxicology and histology samples were taken and reported on; a full digital photo record of the body prior to post mortem and during the post mortem was taken; there was preservation of exhibits; appropriate x-rays taken; preservation and forensic examination of the scene of death. In addition there has been an extraordinary level of oversight rarely seen in deaths of Jamaicans including:
- 3 overseas forensic pathologists reviewed the post mortem report
- consultation with and review by the Metropolitan Police,
- consultation with Pakistani Police
- the full glare of local and international media:
This is also a case in which the Minister has nothing but praise for the Jamaica Constabulary Force and yet he feels that THIS is a case that demands review!
Mr. Minister, we ask why this case demands review and not the countless other cases of “anonymous" Jamaicans, most of them black and poor, many children included?
Cases in which:
- scenes have not been protected, preserved or examined by forensic units;
- there have been allegations (and evidence) of willful disturbing of the scene and destruction of evidence;
- bodies have been moved from scenes before photographs have been taken, despite clear evidence that the person is dead,
- bodies have been moved from the scene to take them to hospital, but have not been taken immediately to the hospital ,
- families have not been visited by the police (except to attempt to bribe or threaten or intimidate them),
- families have been refused permission to see the bodies of their loved ones for days, because it is a police case
- for example,
o the initial investigating officer on the scene says he saw nothing because it was dark and he had no flashlight (Jason Smith),
o the firearms register comes to court with relevant pages missing, and then is burned up in an unexplained fire at a police station (Janice Allen)
o the clothing of the deceased is being discarded at the time of the post mortem, and is only recovered when the observer indicates an interest in them (Sandra Sewell and Gayon Alcott).
- the post mortems have been done in the dark obscurity of that abominable Spanish Town morgue (the majority of which have no oversight whatsoever including: no observers in attendance; no photographic record of body or post mortem; no review of the post mortem report by other pathologists local or overseas, forensic or otherwise.)
- there have been reports of obstruction and hostility on the part of the pathologists and the police to the presence of and requests for independent observers representing the families of the deceased
- no observers have been available for Jamaican families because of the local pathologists' refusal to get involved, and in those few cases where there have been observers, there have been statements that the post mortems don't meet international standards, and questions are raised about the competence of the pathologists, the inadequacy of the post mortem reports
- post mortems have not been conducted for up to 2 MONTHS and where bodies have decomposed because of the delays, to the point where potential evidence re the cause and circumstances of the death has been lost
Mr. Minister, DO THESE CASES AND CIRCUMSTANCES NOT CALL FOR, NEED or GET ANY ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW? Mr. Minister, did none of these cases and circumstances need an administrative review into "the appropriateness of the techniques and the standards of professionalism employed by the police investigators, as well as the medical and other professional personnel"? Do none of these cases bring "into focus the need for the most up-to-date forensic capabilities and the construction of a new public morgue"? Do none of these families need closure? Do ordinary Jamaicans, out of the media spotlight, not need assurance too?
Mr. Minister, your apparent lack of concern for all these other cases, your lack of action on behalf of Jamaicans to fix appalling problems and circumstances that you were well aware of, and your demand now for a review of a case exceptional in the amount of oversight, review and attention it has ALREADY received, is disturbing in the extreme.
Comment