Police Commissioner denies arbitrary arrest by law enforcement officials

October 02, 2014 in National

COPCGWalwynSt. Kitts-Nevis Police Commissioner CG Walwyn has defended the arrest record of his police officers dismissing suggestions that cases were thrown out from the courts for lack of evidence.

“When we get information and the person gives us the statement as being a witness to the incident, then we make the arrest. When it’s time to go to court, and that person decides not to testify, that statement is no good in court. So it’s not that we don’t have any evidence, many times it’s that the witnesses change their minds,” Walwyn said.

He said the law has to be changed because persons arrested were now walking out of the court without any conviction against and leading to allegations that the police were rushing to charge people and bring them to court without the necessary evidence.

“We’ve had people that have made written statements and when they got up there they changed their minds, and we can’t use those statements.”

Walwyn told radio listeners that a new system had been implemented to reduce the chances of cases being tossed out by the court.

“Because of the perception…with the new DPP (Director of Public Prosecution) we have put certain protocols in place, and before we can charge anybody, we must take the case to the DPP for pre-charging advice, so when we pick somebody up there’s enough evidence before they can be charged, and that has been put in place since we’ve had the new DPP.”

Last week, attorney Chesley Hamilton said that he believed there was evidence to support his claim that people were being routinely locked up without enough evidence to take a case to trial, something which he described as an assault on individual rights.

“I know Mr. Hamilton personally. I don’t have beef with Mr. Hamilton. He’s an attorney. I’d be disappointed if he did not provide the best legal defence for his clients. The job of the state is to prove a case, if as a defence attorney he can prove that the state has not proven their case then he deserves to win.

“I don’t take it personal. I applaud him for what he does, because if tomorrow I was on the other side, then I would want an attorney such as he…whatever he says, or anybody says, I don’t go against it. I support their freedom of speech, they’re free to say what they want, but I know at the end of the day, I’m doing what is right,” Walwyn said.