The Editor, Sir:
The Gleaner of Monday March 14, 2005 carried a story of another failed prosecution.
The accused was charged with the murder of one Harrison who, along with another man Bell, was abducted, taken in a motorcar, robbed and shot.
Bell, having escaped, gave evidence at the preliminary examination. He was killed after the preliminary examination and was, therefore, unavailable for the trial.
The prosecution in these not so unusual circumstances was unable to prove that Bell who had died was the Bell who had indeed testified at the preliminary examination.
On paper, the evidence was cogent and compelling. If the report your paper carried was correct, defence counsel simply put in a telephone directory in evidence to prove that there were listings for more than one person with his client's name. The accused walked free.
The fact that an injustice was done in that court is not the only sad event in this unhappy tale. There will be no call for retrials. There will be no talk-shows with the well-known
concerned names bemoaning the great injustice that has been done.
There will be no vigils held for the deceased Harrison and calls for investigations into the case. There will be nothing of the sort. In fact, other than this letter, as my dear mom would say, "you will not even hear pin drop about this case".
What is the reason for this deafening silence? The accused is not a police officer. It appears that the main concern is not with obtaining justice.
If it were so, then there would be a hue and cry for justice for Harrison as the call went up for Janice Allen. What is the concern of these
professional 'justice seekers'?
I am, etc.,
PETER CLARKE
lenmithcus@yahoo.com
