In awarding more than $.4 million to one of the people charged under the Anti Gang legislation during the state of emergency in 2011, a High Court judge yesterday slammed the police officers who charged him, saying they had fabricated the case.
Delivering judgment in favour of Kevin Stewart in a malicious prosecution lawsuit, Justice Joan Charles severely criticised two seniors and a junior police officer for their conduct in the case.
“I also hold that the prosecution of the claimant (Stewart) was malicious in that Police Constable Phillips, together with Assistant Superintendent of Police Mohammed and Assistant Commissioner of Police Fredericks, were motivated by indirect or improper motives,” Charles told the court.
Through his attorney Kevin Ratiram, Stewart had filed the lawsuit after the prosecution discontinued proceedings against him in September 2011, a month after he was charged by PC Phillips with being a gang member, on the grounds there was insufficient evidence.
In a 27-page judgment delivered in the Hall of Justice, Port-of-Spain, the judge found that ASP Zamsheed Mohammed and ACP Fredericks’ handling of the case was in breach of established police procedure and in breach of Section 12.1 of the Anti Gang Act, adding their conduct amounted “to a gross dereliction of their duty.”
Noting that Stewart was taken from his home, family and labelled a gang member by the police when they clearly had no evidence, the judge said:
“The senior police officers—ASP Mohammed and ACP Fredericks—failed to use the 72 hours provided by the Anti Gang Act to obtain a written report from PC Phillips on his investigations of the claimant, so as to satisfy themselves that there was reasonable and probable cause to arrest and charge the latter.
She said immediately after he received the file from Phillips after Stewart was charged, ASP Mohammed should have been able to discern there was insufficient evidence to charge the accused.
“The irresponsible and unprofessional conduct of the senior officers in giving instructions to this very junior officer to charge the claimant when there was no written report or a file before them on the claimant’s alleged gang activity, caused the claimant to suffer damage, embarrassment, the loss of his liberty and was in breach of his constitutional rights.”
Pointing out several contradictions and inconsistencies in Phillips’ evidence, Charles said:
“The fact that this officer, throughout his testimony, attempted to buttress, strengthen and fabricate new evidence against the claimant is a strong basis for concluding that he fabricated the case against the claimant and that in fact he had no reasonable or probable cause to charge him.
“I also form the view, based on the many lies and inconsistencies in his evidence, that the prosecution of this claimant was malicious in that there was indirect or improper motive for proceeding with the charge against him.”
Ruling that the facts of case do not satisfy the requirement of Section 12 and 13 of the Anti Gang Act, the judge said Stewart’s previous convictions for possession and trafficking in drugs could not have formed the basis of reasonable suspicion.
‘Lesson for the police’
Describing the judgment as a victory for the rule of law attorney Kevin Ratiram said that should serve as a lesson to the police.
Noting that more than 400 people were arrested during the state of emergency, he said the police acted as a law unto themselves with total disregard for due process.
“Now that this case has been won, I shall be filing about 20 more similar ones, arising out of the SoE.”
More info:
The state of emergency was declared by the Government on August 21, 2011 after it was announced that a plot to assassinate the Prime Minister and three Cabinet ministers had been uncovered. For two months and 17 days the country was under the state of emergency. The curfew was in effect in the hotspot areas and all citizens were to be in doors between the hours of 11 pm to 4 am.
According to figures released by the police, the SoE saw 463 gang-related arrests; 1,405 people being detained on outstanding warrants; 12,739 rounds of ammunition, 34 magazines and 154 firearms being seized; and 484 people being arrested for breaching the curfew, 833 for other offences and 1,024 on drug offences.
The SoE ended on December 6, 2011.