Justice: Street vs Court
At the end of if not the most celebrated trial in Jamaica in recent times. SSP Adams and two colleaugues were freed after being on trial for the murder of four persons in Kraal Clarendon Jamaica. There were celebration in some quarters and morming in others. What really happened here? I present my views. I hope I don't die doing so.
Justice in the Street
Justice on the street is based on heresay and facts that might be brought to persons by the media, common knowlege on verdandahs and everyday communication on the streets. The verdict is clear. It is clear that the killing could have been avoided. It is also clear that an alleged gunman was on the verandah. The testimony of the little girl was so touching.
In a murder case there needs to be motive(s). The motive in the case in my opinion is simple.
After failing to shoot 'Chen Chen' an alleged gunman, the police were very upset and turned their wrath on those they alleged to have been harbouring criminal(s). Their thinking was you are harbouring alleged criminal(s) you are just as bad as the alleged criminals and you are going to pay. They reasoned that the little girl was innocent so she was taken outside to spare her life. If they knew she would have spoken out against them I reason she would have been dead. Now with four(4) persons dead and only one(1) gun present, they needed another gun to make it look even otherwise it would look odd. That was the motive for the planting of the gun.
In essence they became judge, juror and excutioner.
Even the statement of Danhai Williams, who failed to show in court, tells a tale. Many beleived that there was a telephone call between the Adams camp and Williams camp based on all that we are hearing. You can read the quotes from the folllowing link. Based on the information I present the verdict.
Verdict: Guilty
Justice in Court
Justice in the court depends on the evidence presented and in many cases how it was presented. Based on the evidence presented and the poor prosecution witness it is not very easy to comfortably present a guilty verdict. To send a man to the gallows it can not be on how you feel. It must be a logical not an emotional decision based on the evidence presented in the court. Borrowing a quote by Churhill Neita in the Jamaica Gleaner, "I think that the evidence in this case did not merit a conviction and that the jury gave its calm and deliberate consideration and came to what we consider to be a just and right verdict".
Critical evidence was missing. Where was Danhai William's statement? He should have gone to court and told his story, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
If a I was a member of the jury my vote would have been not guilty.
Verdict: Not Guilty.
Real Judgment coming
Once again the prosecution did a poor job. I will tell everyone, do not worry there is a judgment coming, where all truths will be known. God himself will judge and true justice will be given.
They might be freed in the courts and guilty in the street but when they sleep at night they will held be prisioners to the truth of what happened in Kraal on the evening/night of May 7, 2003.
Links of Interest
Gleaner May 9, 2003
Adams Freed December 21, 2005
Justice in the Street
Justice on the street is based on heresay and facts that might be brought to persons by the media, common knowlege on verdandahs and everyday communication on the streets. The verdict is clear. It is clear that the killing could have been avoided. It is also clear that an alleged gunman was on the verandah. The testimony of the little girl was so touching.
In a murder case there needs to be motive(s). The motive in the case in my opinion is simple.
After failing to shoot 'Chen Chen' an alleged gunman, the police were very upset and turned their wrath on those they alleged to have been harbouring criminal(s). Their thinking was you are harbouring alleged criminal(s) you are just as bad as the alleged criminals and you are going to pay. They reasoned that the little girl was innocent so she was taken outside to spare her life. If they knew she would have spoken out against them I reason she would have been dead. Now with four(4) persons dead and only one(1) gun present, they needed another gun to make it look even otherwise it would look odd. That was the motive for the planting of the gun.
In essence they became judge, juror and excutioner.
Even the statement of Danhai Williams, who failed to show in court, tells a tale. Many beleived that there was a telephone call between the Adams camp and Williams camp based on all that we are hearing. You can read the quotes from the folllowing link. Based on the information I present the verdict.
Verdict: Guilty
Justice in Court
Justice in the court depends on the evidence presented and in many cases how it was presented. Based on the evidence presented and the poor prosecution witness it is not very easy to comfortably present a guilty verdict. To send a man to the gallows it can not be on how you feel. It must be a logical not an emotional decision based on the evidence presented in the court. Borrowing a quote by Churhill Neita in the Jamaica Gleaner, "I think that the evidence in this case did not merit a conviction and that the jury gave its calm and deliberate consideration and came to what we consider to be a just and right verdict".
Critical evidence was missing. Where was Danhai William's statement? He should have gone to court and told his story, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
If a I was a member of the jury my vote would have been not guilty.
Verdict: Not Guilty.
Real Judgment coming
Once again the prosecution did a poor job. I will tell everyone, do not worry there is a judgment coming, where all truths will be known. God himself will judge and true justice will be given.
They might be freed in the courts and guilty in the street but when they sleep at night they will held be prisioners to the truth of what happened in Kraal on the evening/night of May 7, 2003.
Links of Interest
Gleaner May 9, 2003
Adams Freed December 21, 2005
Comments
1) The prosecution's job is usually a lot harder. The burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt - otherwise the accused must be acquitted. The evidence the prosecution presents comes from the police. (the "police" was on trial) so....
2) Jurors, irrespective of the case presented, have their own views on things. That is why they ought to be sequestered. If my memory serves me right, those jurors went home every day and very likely followed the news or conversations of their friends - (although instructed by the Court every day at the end of the hearing not to do so) thus forming their very own opinions regardless of the evidence that would have been presented.
Justice as we want it to be is in many instances unachievable. Justice in many instances depends not on the truth but rather on the players in the case ie who is on trial, who comprises the jury and who is/are the victim(s).
Maybe I am wrong but maybe I could be right.