Damion Mitchell | Wheel an' come again, Commissioner

So, it is true! Wah nuh happen in a year, happen in a day!

On Tuesday, just over 12 hours after The Gleaner published a list of 12-month-old questions that Police Commissioner Major General Antony Anderson had on multiple occasions committed to answering, came his responses via email at 1:15 p.m.

READ: Frozen in time, Commissioner? Dat mek sense?

At that time, the Commissioner may have still been preparing for his 2 p.m. press conference, exactly one year to the day since the questions were originally posed.

I reckon that this robbed him of the time he needed to properly pen his responses.

But as my mother once told me: “If yuh run too fast, yuh haffi run two time.” And dat mek sense, this time!

Here are the commissioner's full responses to the questions first posed to him at a virtual press conference on February 1, 2021, emailed the same day, resent on June 17, 2021 and again posed to the chief constable at another press conference on September 15, 2021:

Question 1: Can the High Command provide an update on the number of cold cases now on record and how many are being actively pursued? 

ANSWER: A 'cold case' is any one where, given the evidence available, the police are unable to pursue it further. Unless there is new evidence that brings a case to the fore, then it's considered cold. Given the fact that there is no statute of limitations on criminal matters, it would be very difficult to give a figure for 'cold cases' in the 154-year history of JCF (Jamaica Constabulary Force). If a matter is being actively pursued, it is not a 'cold case'.

Question 2: How many cops will not be re-enlisted as a consequence of their performance assessment?
ANSWER: This is not a matter that the JCF would comment on in the public domain.

Question 3: How concerned are you about the slow pace of concluding internal investigations into alleged inappropriate conduct by your members? 
ANSWER: While the Constabulary notes the fact that internal investigations may take a considerably long time to be brought to a conclusion once commenced, the need for due diligence and thorough (sic)

Question 4: Can you provide an update on these specific cases that were the subject of internal probes? 

• December 2016 - Fourteen-year-old Portmore rape victim transported in the same police car as her alleged offender, who later escaped at the station.

ANSWER: During the process of locating the crime scene, one of the suspects was pointed out by the complainant. The Police immediately reacted and apprehended that suspect. The matter was placed before the St Catherine Parish Court. The Administrative File has been completed and closure of the matter has been recommended.

• May 2020 - Mandeville corporal in station brawl with woman inspector. 

ANSWER: The Administrative investigation has been completed and submitted. Disciplinary Action has been recommended.

• October 2020 - Woman turned away from the Constant Spring Police Station after arriving during curfew hours to report an incident of domestic violence. 

ANSWER: The Administrative file has been completed and the matter is currently before the Court of Enquiry, awaiting a verdict.

Let's pause here for a moment of reality (sigh).

Commissioner, it is as clear as day that in the main, these responses were rushed, regrettable and really an embarrassment to the people in whose abilities you declared an abiding faith to reason, know what looks reasonable and what “don't mek sense”.

Let's concede that over the 154 years of the JCF there may be innumerable cold cases. But should we really accept that you have no idea how many have been reopened purely on the interpretation that “if a matter is being actively pursued, it is not a 'cold case'?” Dat mek sense?

On now to question two. I happen to know that the refusal of reenlistment is among the categories under which police attrition is recorded. In fact, most of those who are refused reenlistment would have failed their performance assessment. But you have declined to inform the tax-paying public of the number of cops who will be struck from the force because they are not meeting the requisite standards. That, too, nuh mek sense.

Commissioner, to have declined to provide this information is a missed opportunity to reinforce transparency and accountability.

GATHER YOUR THOUGHTS

Since your response to question three was incomplete, I will spare some time for you to gather your thoughts. After all, we have been waiting more than a year, anyway.

Of all the questions though, it is the response to the first part of question four that has left me frozen.

Here's the replay: Can you provide an update on this specific case that was the subject of an internal probe?

• December 2016 - Fourteen-year-old Portmore rape victim transported in the same police car as her alleged offender, who later escaped at the station.

ANSWER: During the process of locating the crime scene, one of the suspects was pointed out by the complainant. The Police immediately reacted and apprehended that suspect. The matter was placed before the St Catherine Parish Court. The administrative file has been completed and closure of the matter has been recommended.

This issue will not melt into oblivion just like that.

Are we to accept that the actions of these cops were consistent with force policy?

Are we to believe that the closure of the matter means the officers were cleared of any wrongdoing?

Are we to understand that there was no breach that led to the escape of the suspect?

Or should we just wait to see whether the recommendation to close the file will be accepted?

I would rather wait to hear.

In fact, I would prefer if you wheel an' come again.

- Damion Mitchell is Integration Editor at The Gleaner. Email damion.mitchell@gleanerjm.com