Charging gang witness would have hurt case – Bailey
Published:Tuesday | March 8, 2022 | 12:09 AMTanesha Mundle/Staff Reporter
Deputy Commissioner of Police Fitz Bailey testified on Monday that he made a judgement call not to charge a former top-tier member of the Clansman-One Don Gang as he was of the view that the ex-gangster would not have cooperated with the police and that charging him would have a “negative impact” on the case.
The senior officer, who made the decision in 2018 in his capacity as assistant commissioner of police in charge of the Counter-Terrorism and Organised Crime Investigation Branch, further shared that the decision was made “in the interest of national security” and “for the greater good”.
Further, he said the police did not have sufficient evidence to charge the witness, who is one of two ex-gang members testifying for the Crown.
The question of why the self-confessed gangster was never charged was repeatedly raised by the defence and also by Chief Justice Bryan Sykes, who has implied that the witness should have been charged or be subjected to a plea deal.
Investigators, including the lead officer, were unable to provide the court with an answer despite being grilled.
A police inspector who supervised the gang investigation later told the court that the decision to not charge the ex-gangster was done at another level and that he was not privy to the reasons.
But on Monday, Bailey, during his testimony, said: “During the case conferences, not only was I privy to the information given by (the witness), I was also briefed regularly on the other lines of enquiry and having all of that information, I was satisfied that there was inadequate evidence to mount an investigation against (the witness).”
He also said that the information that was provided by the witnesses was supported by other witnesses and other types of evidence.
“In the interest of national security and for the greater good and having had dialogue with the DPP, I directed the officers to proceed without charging (the witness),” he said, adding that he believed the evidence was credible.
At the same time, the deputy commissioner, under cross-examination from Lloyd McFarlane, the attorney representing reputed gang leader Andre ‘Blackman’ Bryan, denied that he had decided from the first day he met the witness that he was going use him against his client and the other 32 defendants.
He also disagreed that he was not aware from the moment he had interviewed the witness and gave instruction for him to deliver a statement that he was going to admit to crimes for which he could not be charged.
Bailey told the court that although the witness was never cautioned, what he said in the statement could have been used against him.
Following Bailey’s testimony, Justice Sykes questioned what further evidence the police needed after the witness confessed to participating in murders, transporting illegal weapons, and transporting gangsters to kill victims.
“If you check out those stories and those stories are true and the gentleman is saying I was involved, what more would be needed to convince the police that he was really involved?” the judge said.
The deputy commissioner in his defence said based on his understanding of the anti-gang legislation, a person from within the organisation was required to give evidence against other members to corroborate the claims.
Sykes, however, questioned the purpose of the plea-bargain legislation if persons who confess to those serious crimes “don’t even spend a day in a prison”.
“So the moral of the story seems to be if I am murderer, all I need to escape a day in prison, all I need to do, is talk to the police,” he added.
The trial will continue today with the judge having a hearing to determine whether to hear testimony from a police witness who is being called to identify a member of the gang who has not been identified by either of the two former members.