The Braeton Inquest has finally reached the stage of a 6-4 jury verdict that no one was criminally responsible for the deaths of seven young men, fatally shot by a police party in March last year.
As was perhaps inevitable, the initial reaction to the verdict has elicited disappointment and disagreement particularly from attorneys representing families of the dead youths; for the event stirred strong feeling pro and con.
The death of all seven supposedly engaged in a gun battle with the police was bound to attract nationwide attention.
As we understand the findings, Coroner Lorna Errar-Gayle exercised her discretion in following the section of the Coroner's Act which states in part that "The Coroner may accept the verdict of the majority and the majority shall in that case certify the verdict..."
There is scope, however, for further legal action in the matter arising from the provision that the Coroner exercised her discretion in accepting the majority verdict in circumstances where the minority was more than two jurors.
This leaves scope for the intervention of the Director of Public Prosecutions at whose instance a Judge of the Supreme Court may order another inquest. This could be on the ground of "rejection of evidence, irregularity of proceedings, insufficiency of enquiry" or other considerations.
The effect of such a development would be to render the 6-4 decision null and void and the whole proceeding would be done anew.
As we understand it there would have to be a strong case made out for any judge to interfere with the discretionary powers of another, particularly where, as in this case, the Coroner exercised her discretion within the ambit of the law.
In other judicial proceedings, such as civil matters at issue, judges do hand down detailed reasons for their decisions. In a coroner's inquest there is provision for an "inquisition" in writing. We hope that when this document has been completed by the Coroner and the jurors who concur with the verdict, it will be made public. This could in large measure help to dispel any doubts which the public harbours about the verdict.
The controversy may persist, however, as is indicated by the reaction from Amnesty International to the effect that the proceedings were "deeply flawed".
The Braeton tragedy is a bloody chapter of our times which still challenges the capacity of our justice system.
