Skip to main content

Tivoli COE: Ballistic Testing Priority

The GOJ has announced a budget of $100m for the Tivoli Commission of Enquiry; in addition to identifying a replacement for Velma Hylton QC. However, whilst the the candidate's name has been forwarded to the Leader of the Opposition in the "consultation ritual", there is still no indication of the proposed start up date.

Of course it will be argued that such will depend, in part, on the availability of the Commissioners, the supporting staff, as well as the outstanding ballistics report - which its is said to have bedeviled the now retired Public Defender.

Interesting the tension between the Office of the Public Defender and the Independent Commission of Investigation (INDECOM) as to the apportionment of blame for the delay seemed to be resolved with the former (probably as a departing gift) sending copies of some 42 files to the latter (without the public being given any reasons).

These constitute the set that-- in the view of the Public Defender after analysing the respective post- mortem reports, along with other information gathered--- death could have been the result  extra-judicial killings by the members of the Security Forces involved in the operation,

                             Concern:   The Priority

It has been reported that at least 76 persons were killed during the operation.  Only some 42 have been identified by the Public Defender as possible " extra- judicial killings". Hence INDECOM has decided to "prioritize" the testing to those 42, citing the cost involved, plus the possibility that the tests of the others may not provide any useful information.

 The ballistic report has the potential for establishing scientifically from which weapon the fatal bullet was fired. The validity of the report depends to large measure on the integrity of the material collected, the conditions of its storage, the tests conducted with the weapons submitted for testing.

With so many variables are involved it is very likely  that some tests will prove "inconclusive" Given that 34 cases have been excluded before the comparison testing and assuming say a 50%  confirmation, then what the public is left with is a possible 21 cases linked to the Security Forces---a far cry from the reported 76-- a figure that has been said to be grossly underestimated.


  • Is that to be explained/dismissed as "collateral damage"?
  • What is the inference to be drawn regarding the 55-- which are not prioritized or tested "inconclusive"?
  • What scientific analysis will be undertaken of those 55?
There lies the possibility of a big "let down" in the eyes of an already cynical public.

The ballistics must be accompanied by the post-mortem reports. It is the latter that will provide the critical information surrounding the circumstance under which the 76 met their deaths.
With the passage of time eye witness evidence becomes increasingly unreliable. Greater reliance has  to be placed on scientific and documentary evidence.
Any sincere attempt to unearth the truth must take into account both the ballistic reports and the post- motems. The latter have been completed: we await the former with an informed expectation.





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Declaration" Not "Determination"

Both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House of Representatives have conveniently confused calls for declaration of citizenship status by Members of either House with the determination of questions as to membership of either House. The Chief Justice of Jamaica has determined that individuals who have renewed their US passports and travelled thereon are disqualified from being validly elected or appointed as a Member of either House. Proponents of the impotence of the Speaker, in the matter of requiring a declaration by individual members, have sought to rely on Section 44 (1) of the Constitution which states: Any question whether - a. any person has been validly elected or appointed as a member of either House; or b. any member of either House has vacated his seat therein or is required, under the provisions of subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 41 of this Constitution, to cease to exercise any of his functions as a member, shall be determined by the Supreme Court ...

By-Election Predisposition

Introduction A massive amount of time and resources have been devoted to the issue of the course to be properly taken once a victorious electoral candidate has been found to be "disqualified" under S. 40 of the Constitution of Jamaica. Simply put, the crux of the matter is whether the second place candidate should, without more, be accorded the seat by the court; or that the said election be deemed null and void and a by-election ordered to decide the people's representative. This matter consumed inordinate amounts of energy - judicial and otherwise - due primarily to the silence of the Constitution on what recourse should be adopted in such circumstance. A cardinal tenet of democratic government is that the people must decide their representatives and not a select grouping - no matter their qualification or status. The Constitution of Jamaica fully recognized this imperative even though it expressly delegates the determination of questions as to membership of either Ho...

Communication Error!

Jamaica Gleaner Contributor, Martin Henry has written an interesting article entitled “Victory for the rule of law” published on Sunday, April 20, 2008 . In his last paragraph Henry stated: " A troubled citizen's concerns about the legitimacy of laws passed in the past with the participation of MPs who may have been in Daryl Vaz's dual-allegiance position was published as The Letter of the Day by The Gleaner last Wednesday [April 16]. Lawyer Dr Paul Ashley made a great deal out of the same issue when we both appeared on the TV programme Impact on that same day. The Constitution dissolves these fears in the wisely anticipatory provision of Section 51 (2): "The presence or participation of any person not entitled to be present or to participate in the proceedings of the House shall not invalidate those proceedings." Interpreting legal provisions is an exercise fraught with dangers, especially if one is not acquainted with the rules governing interpretation. Without...