Reporter avoids jail threat as AG declines to prosecute
(CNS): The country’s top attorney has said that he will not be moving ahead with a prosecution against The Caymanian Compass or its reporter, Brent Fuller. Following a vote in the Legislative Assembly calling for the AG to bring criminal proceedings because politicians believed the paper and the reporter had broken sections 18 and 19 of the Legislative Assembly Immunities, Powers and Privileges Law, Samuel Bulgin, the attorney general, has said he won’t be doing so. The call to prosecute came in the wake of a news story and editorial that questioned why the Freedom of Information law would be reviewed behind closed doors.
A motion tabled by Ezzard Miller asking the AG to bring charges against Fuller and the daily newspaper was supported by the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly earlier this month. However, Bulgin said in today’s statement, “I am of the opinion that there should be no prosecutions in this matter. In the circumstances, the decision is that there will be no criminal proceedings instituted against Mr Brent Fuller and or the Caymanian Compass.”
In the wake of Bulgin’s statement Miller told CNS that he was satisfied with the AG’s decision. “I have asked the authorities to prosecute plenty of people that I believe have broken the law before and they usually don’t do it, so there is nothing different here,” Miller said. “I believed the law had been broken. I did what the process allows me to do; that’s all I can do.”
Miller argued that Fuller’s article and the editorial supporting it gave the impression that the members of the Legislative Assembly were doing something unlawful when they had said the FOI select committee review was being held in secret. The Compass argued, however, that the report was factual as the meetings will be held in camera and that the editorial was merely a fair comment on the situation.
Category: Local News
Thank you Mr. Bulgin (AG) for putting a stop to this foolishness!
Hopefully the Speaker, Ezzard and the other lawmakers that voted to prosecute Mr. Fuller will take a step back….realize that no one is always right….and then let this go. And get on with the Real and pressing business of these islands!
And Ezzard, now you move onto rediculing Mr. Legge? Just let it go man! While you are learned in many aspects, it seems clear that you continue to lack the maturity to accept that ALL humans are falible…this means you too!
Such things as FOI and Transparency are needed for ALL (except of course National Security to a degree). Again, this includes you and our LA.
Going on tirades against anyone you disagree with (seemingly moreso if they are foreign) is NOT going to help our Islands….nor anyone therein!
Signed,
Born ya Caymanian!
Flawed logic? Nope. Just the basis of logic here: the truth.
For example: I can say, with no fear of you or anyone else successfully arguing otherwise, that not all of the people who forcibly take money from others at gunpoint are guilty of a crime.
Since you are trying to flirt with logic, I must point out that your analysis is hopelessly flawed. Logic is not going on a date with you quite yet.
Guilt in the Compass case is strictly a matter for the court to decide. Contrary to your passionate but incorrect assertions, and whether you like it or not, in this country innocence is assumed until the accused is found guilty. The paper and reporter are in truth 100% innocent.
If I am not correct then it should be a simple matter for you to prove, or at least produce good evidence and a credible indictment, that they are guilty of the crime alleged by Ezzard Miller. You can do neither. Your viewpoint fails this acid test because it has no basis in fact. The onus of proving guilt is on the accuser. I will go supporting the reporter’s and newspaper’s rights under this democracy and will side with their innocence. It is most likely that the reason the AG did not proceed with a trial is because he is of the opinion that Miller’s accusations were without merit and prosecution would be pointless.
Evidence in the Compass case is not really physical – just thoughts, ideas, words. Borrowing from your rather absurd analogy, in the Compass case there was no recovered cash, no fingerprints, no videos or eye witnesses to substantiate an actual act and the commission of a crime. Indeed the alleged crime was a thought crime: just words and the thoughts incited by those words, and ultimately an opinion of guilt or no guilt based resulting from due process of law. In this case, without due process (a trial), the status of the suspect is not guilty. Period! That is the default status of such a suspect in this country. Maybe not in your mind, but that is the way it is in this democracy. So suck it up and move on.
Perhaps you are possessed of expert legal skill in the matter of journalism law. Are you? If so I may be led to respect your opinion – if you can present a sound case. So far you have not even come close.
The realm of the intangible – ideas and words – bears little in common with guns and stolen cash.The potential case against the reporter and Compass pivots upon whether the fine line between factual reporting and intentionally misleading sensationalism and defamatory ridicule was crossed. This is a matter of degree, circumstance, and opinion.
A single idea can be expressedin many ways; for example: "Again as has been the case many times before, during questioning at the latest press briefing Mr. Smurf did not fully disclose the tenor of the XYZ contract. Smurf, always the clever politician, has not yet revealed his reasons for the lack of transparency." Or consider: "Smurf stonewalled when grilled by the press about the XYZ contract and refused to reveal important points about the contract and his involvement in the matter. Smurf is keeping his reasons for doing so a deep secret." Now consider another version: "The press encounter as Mr.. Smurf exited the building was an exercise more reminiscent of a Q&A with Saddam Hussein than a politician facing the news media in a democratic country. The cagey politico angrily evaded reporters and repeatedly sidestepped their questions about his involvement regarding the XYZ Company contract. Smurf obviously lied about several issues regarding his personal and political actions surrounding the secret contract. Smurf’s continued dishonesty with the press in matters surrounding the contract and his disgraceful misuse of power all serve to underscore his guilt and should lead this country to the horrific realisation that Smurf is the most evil politician that this country has ever elected. It is hard to fathom what sinister motives remain at play as Smurf continues his evasive antics, still striving to keep the whole matter a deep dark secret."
Sensationalism has degrees and depends on circumstances. When the criminal line is crossed is not as clear as you might think. Which report above do you think crossed the line? Wait a minute before you jump. You see, depending on circumstances all of the reports may have crossed the line. Or maybe none of them did!
If the politician never had any involvement with any contracts or negotiations whatsoever, then all of the reports are false and could be found misleading. In such a circumstance, the last account would certainly be judged as being scandalous and a crime. However, if the politician in question had just stepped out of a courtroom in handcuffs, headed for jail after having lost his final appeal relative to convictions for a multi-million dollar fraud and cover-up murders involving a government contract with his bogus company XYZ Ltd – and should the reporters be asking for clarification of his own sworn testimony presented in the courts – none of the reports would likely be judged scandalous.
Compounding the difficulty in determining criminal guilt in a journalism case is that the line may be crossed intentionally or unintentionally. I have never heard of an armed robber unintentionally walking into a bank, unintentionally pointing a gun, and unintentionally walking out with a bag of cash. Have you? However, just a bit of poor judgment in writing and publishing a news story can get a reporter and newspaper in plenty of hot water, regardless of intent. Notwithstanding, guilt relative to any crime cannot be inferred simply because of an accusation or even a legislative resolution to request prosecution. Either the robber did or did not take the cash and flee. The matter is not subject to any wide of latitude of opinion in the mind of a judge. The legal line regarding armed robbery is quite well defined legally. It is sharp even in the eyes of a layman. If the proper evidence is presented, a guilty verdict is a comparatively easy decision for a trial judge. However, determining whether thoughts, ideas and the structure of words on apage cross a very fine and arbitrary line is another matter entirely.
The line between "good" and "bad" writing for public consumption is often an obscure one. Criminal guilt in the case of published ideas is often entirely a matter of circumstance. For example, here, as a private person expressing your personal opinion about a public personality, you can imply opinions of guilt or stupidity, however, if you were reporting on this matter as a newspaper reporter the same expressions might land you in jail.
Anyway, regardless of guilt, your bubble remains burst.
The right thinking people of these islands owe the Hon. Attorney General a good deal of thanks for his pragmatic and responsible handling of this ridiculous situation.
And the nine legislators who voted for the motion should think long and hard about the fact that they were so effectively and transparently "played". Hint: who voted against it?
In the meantime, the press can take some comfort from the fact that the current North Side member is really an old softy compared to a previous holder of his office. Consider the following passage from Dick Gentry’s book "At The Foot Of The Southern Cross" recalling his adventures in the 70s as editor of The Caymanian Weekly:
"One day after an accidental drowning in the harbour he met me in the street and stopped directly in front of me, blocking my path. The man who had drowned was an associate editor for Billy Bodden’s newspaper. Standing face to face on the sidewalk, where he had blocked my path, Craddock Ebanks glared at me. ‘Well I’m sorry to see you’, he snarled. ‘I heard an editor had drowned in the harbour and I was praying it was you!’"
It takes a real stretch to lay the voting of those 9 politicians at the feet of McKeeva Bush.
It is easy to blame others but each politician who voted to move the country backwards needs to look at themselves and the politician who made the motion needs extra time in self examination.
To compare this current politician who made the motion to an ancient politician is meaningless. It is like comparing the current work permit system to slavery and saying how much softer is todays system.
It sounds like a spin to me.
Mr. Miller, how come you’re so intent on pursuing someone who has not broken the law, yet when it comes to those who have (ie. the business owners who have stolen pension money from their employees; the business owners who have not made the required pension and health contributions for years on end, etc.) you remain SILENT??? huh? Yeah, that’s what I thought….
XXXXX
Guys ,
We found out something about Ezzard Miller that we did not know before!
As an elected member he does not just write the laws but he also advocates for the prosecution of our citizens! Is that dictatorship or what?
Ezzard not so fast, We need you to come back to this forum and tell the citizens what kind of crimes these people committed for which you want the A.G. to prosecute them. We need to know EXACTLY HOW YOU THINK AND FEEL and what you consider is WRONG OR RIGHT,so please stop making these kinds of empty and baseless statements with a lot of holes in it. As a lawmaker you should know better.
You should have at least stated that "In the past I have recommended prosecution of certain individuals that I am sure was breaking the law based on the preponderance of evidence etc, etc" which would have made more sense and intelligence coming from a lawmaker!
I’m talking about some kind of proof Mr. Miller. Prosecuting people is not like going to your refigerator and cherry picking which flavor soda you will drink today! You’re talking about people with families, that have jobs, and a future. Who are you to take it upon yourself as AN ELECTED Legislator to change someone’s destiny by SENDING THEM TO JAIL?!
Sory Ezzard I’m glad we found you out early before its too late.
Just curious, WHO WERE THOSE PEOPLE?
People we need to know who we are electing. Ezzard has put his foot in his mouth even in making this very small statement!
To Anon Tues. 12/21/10 11:03 You seem very intent on getting the names of people who were reported for allegedly committing crimes .Why? Just wondering if you have something to hide.
Anon Tue. 11:03 Are you saying that MLAs should not report crimes or ask for prosecution if they are of the opinion that a crime has been committed?That means that if you assaulted Mr Miller or made a threat against him ,you believe that he should not ask for your prosecution because in the past he may have been involved in passing a law making such actions criminal. You are way off base. Furthermore ,even if Mr Miller reported you to the police and you were later taken to court and sent to jail,it would be a judge or magistrate giving the orders ;not Mr Miller.
Someone said that Moses Kirkconnell voted in favour of prosecution?
Oh god, no!
Please tell me that ain’t so!
David Legge is right, Ezzard Miller is out of bounds, increasingly antiquated, and to be honest, about as useful to the future of politrix in Cayman as the leader himself – El Jefe – I just won’t bow to calling him his self-infused title of Premiere.
Time will tell how this plays out. Cayman is on the cusp of some pretty nation determining political moves.
Today’s crime, coupled with the current government’s lacadasical attitude towards it and the increasing rumblings of corruption and bad leadership put us on course to be the next T&C under direct rule… And if the previous commentary is true, I sure as hell hope we do end up there.
BUT…
And a really big but…. I honestly believe, that despite the current Leader’s unintended efforts to lead us awry, coupled with the increasingly unpopular or intollerable business environment and the proliferation of crime, Cayman is still, ultimately the best place to live by a long shot.
We will have to bear the burden of the last of the dino-saw-us throwbacks from the outer districts, but once the Lizards and others either come around and accept the changing face of Cayman, or die off in perpetuum, we will have the ugly patronistic outcries. Eventually, we will reach a new balance of populus vs power. Hopefully it will be honestly based, but I fear for the day Cayman ventures down the T&C roads, or Bahamas and Bermudian intollerance. If we do, it’s all over, Jack.
Let’s cut the NS and EE nationalistic attitude out and WORK TOGETHER for a UNIFIED Cayman that recognizes we are a nation of nations – we were built by many, are sustained by many, and don’t need to go getting all protectionist to the point of destroying our nation by appearing to be a bunch of self supporting inbreds who refuse to embrace the future of open and transparent trade and living.
I IS Caymanian, IS proud to say it, and AM welcoming the influence of the world onto my island.
As an older Caymanian I have to say you made my day. I am so glad to see that in the next generation we have people with pragmatic optimism.
To Stan’upnah, It seems as if you are blinded by greed.Just because you appear to have sold out to the highest bidder ,don’t expect all Caymanians to follow.One more thing:when speaking of appearing to be inbred ,are you including yourself?
So MLA’s like Mark and Dwayne (who are not suppose to be MLA’s) has voted to get Mr Fuller arrested?
Give me a break! Like anyone was ever prosecuted for anything here!!!
I wonder how many people have actually read the article or editorial.At first I was of the opinion that this was totally unwarranted but took time to read both, and I have decided that there is some merit in condemning the language used in the editorial.This editorial used phrases like "the secret subcommittee" and "this secret body". The fact is, the subcommittee was not a secret body since its membership was named in the said article.There is a difference between a committee meeting in secret (not open to the public) and a" secret committee" (one not known to the public) and The Compass should endeavour to avoid causing confusion between the two.Again ,please read the article and editorial. CNS ,perhaps you could provide links to these.
Is the subcommittee meeting behind closed doors? Yes, hence secret.
I know many Masons, but I don’t kno what happens in their meetings, hence they are deemed a secret society.
Also this is an Editorial not a news story. An editorial by it’s very nature is an Opinion.
If you actually beleive this was worth a full days discussion in the LA while the country is in it’s worst recession for 50 years, and if you beleive the AG has nothing better to do with his expensive tax paid time that is your opinion.
Personally I think the LA’s should be forced to take a days vacation or pay back the money paid to them for this timewasting.
The Attorney General appeared to choose his words carefully.Please note that the statement said that he was of the opinion that no prosecution should take place.This does not mean that Mr Fuller was innocent,it simply means that a decision was made to not prosecute.In this instance the AG sided with the premier which is not surprising since he also ruled in favour of the UDP candidates in the recent election fiasco involving two Bodden Town candidates.
Hey, 18:14! Helloooooh! Knock…knock…
Anybody home…???
In this democracy anyway – I do not know about the oppressive regime in the the country you come from – but this is how it works here:
Personal opinions of guilt notwithstanding, the fact that neither Mr. Fuller nor The Compass were found guilty of the crime means that Mr. Fuller and the Compass are 100% innocent of the crime!
Sorry to burst your bubble.
(Actually that is a lie. I rather enjoy bursting bubbles when they are fabricated of a flimsy film of foolishness and inflated by nonsense.)
To Just Commentin’ Mon.12/20/10 21:13 Using your flawed logic ,I guess all of the people taking money at gunpoint are 100% innocent since they have not been found guilty.In the case of Mr Fuller and The Compass ,there was no trial so the AG never said that they were not found guilty (or that they were 100% innocent).
Your analogy is itself a little flawed. With an armed robbery, there is no question that a criminal offence has been committed, so the offender is innocent only because he/she has not been apprehended and successfully prosecuted. Mr. Fuller’s case is the exact opposite. We know who and where he is, but we do not know that any crime has been committed.
On balance, I think most reasonable people would think Mr. Fuller can consider himself innocent.
"Personal opinions of guilt notwithstanding, the fact that neither Mr. Fuller nor The Compass were found guilty of the crime means that Mr. Fuller and the Compass are 100% innocent of the crime!"
Er…no. That’s not what it means at all: (a) the matter never went to court so there was no opportunity for them to be found guilty; (b) the AG has not disclosed his reasons for not proceeding. It may well be that he determined that while offences were made out it was not in the public interest to prosecute; and (c) Even if he had prosecuted and they were found not guilty by the court that would simply mean that that prosecution had not proved its case and not that they were necessarily "100% innocent of the crime".
I don’t usually respond to fashion editors like David R. Legge and his wishes for my political future, consider this whatever it is I doubt very much he will have anything to do with it.
I wonder how many people he has seen breaking the law, that he has not reported, he should not jump to conclusions about how many peolpe the police or the AG have convicted, on my reporting them under suspicion that they had broken some law. If more persons, including Mr. Legge, took a stand against against crime particular "white collar" crime, Cayman might have kept the low crime rate, that we once bragged of.
Mr. Legge need not concern himself about my political future, as I am fully aware that if him and his backers had their way I would not now be representing North Side.
Fashion editor he may indeed be, Mr Miller, (and I loathe his magazine) but at least he is literate, ie, he can spell, punctuate and construct grammatically and syntactically correct sentences ( so I suppose he could never be an MLA in Cayman).
You and Mrs Lawrence share similar views and attitudes on many things. You need to just "suck it up" that you are not correct in these views all the time, no matter how you posture and pontificate. The world has changed and so has Cayman – not always for the better I grant you. Perhaps "The Herald" and "The Voice" ushered in some of these changes in attitudes, particularly towards our elected politicians.
Ummh, say whaaaaa?
Mr. Miller reveals far more than intended in his rambling illogical statement regarding David Legge. It is embarassing to consider that this is the quality of writing one observes from a government minister. The jargon used combined with the grammatical and spelling errors and lack of cohesion or logical flow make his "argument" unreadable. But the real kicker is his ridiculous statement that "If more persons, including Mr. Legge, took a stand against against crime particular "white collar" crime, Cayman might have kept the low crime rate, that we once bragged of." So, according to Mr. Miller, the real problem in Cayman is "white collar" crime, and not the burglaries, murders and other gang-related violence that has been mainly reported in the news. I will refrain from commenting on this absurd statement… let’s just say that it certainly is revealing and not in a pleasant manner.
Mr. Miller: You have just insulted fashion editors everywhere. I wouldn’t want to be in your Gucci’s….
Get over it Ezzard. We need all your time on the overdue accounts.
I don’t usually respond to politicians such as Mr. Miller because, well, what’s the use?
Nevertheless, I would appreciate CNS readers taking a moment to read verbatim what Mr. Miller wrote in his post, namely:
“I wonder how many people he [Mr. Legge] has seen breaking the law, that he has not reported, he should not jump to conclusions about how many peolpe the police or the AG have convicted, on my reporting them under suspicion that they had broken some law. If more persons, including Mr. Legge, took a stand against against crime particular "white collar" crime, Cayman might have kept the low crime rate, that we once bragged of.”
What on earth is Mr. Miller trying to say?
The Attorney General might want to consider prosecuting Mr. Miller for his assault on the English language. In truth, Mr. Miller would be well advised to cozy up to any editor he could find—fashion or otherwise—to straighten out his prose. On second thought, a translator might be more effective than an editor.
More substantively, Mr. Miller is incorrect in assuming that if I had my way, he would not now be representing North Side. Not true. I think he’s doing a good job representing his constituents.
While it is true that morepeople voted for me for a certain honor in my high school graduation class than voted for Mr. Miller in the last North Side election, I do believe he is emerging as a champion of his people, especially the struggling and the downtrodden.
So many Caymanians, especially the elderly, are being left behind in their own country—they’re having difficulty paying their bills, social services are woefully inadequate, and they’re working, if they’re still able, well beyond their years. Mr. Miller speaks for them, and any politician, or humanitarian, would be wise to listen.
I met Mr. Miller many years ago when he was leading the effort to build a new hospital for GeorgeTown (at the bargain price, if I recall, of $17 million). In the magazine I edited, Newstar, I supported him in every way I could and was impressed with his grasp of detail and his determination to see things through, despite substantial opposition to the project.
In the intervening years, I have observed Mr. Miller becoming increasingly negative, derisive, and divisive, as is evidenced in his Tuesday morning appearances on Rooster radio. He has many of the attributes of a leader but appearing mean-spirited, I predict, will be his fatal flaw for this obvious reason:
Most Caymanians are not mean-spirited.
David, well said. I am simply amazed at what has happened and what is happening to our wonderful country. It is not an exaggeration to say the country is out of control.
"Press on"
Ezzard and his negativity that he espouses on the radio weekly is a concern for me. Obviously there is support for Ezzard on that radio station and his positions but my worry is that he is a divisive influence on the country.
The temperament of the country is changing and I don’t see Ezzard as a uniter of the various groups that make up the Cayman Islands.
No matter what Ezzard does the old days are gone. Solving problems and teaching tolerance is what is needed in Cayman.
My current idea is child support paid by deadbeat dads.
Ezzard, why don’t you just quit while your ahead.
I want to report a crime!
I WANT TO REPORT A CRIME!
"…if him and his backers had their way…" (???)
Ahem…
Try: "…if he and his backers…"
Huh? Poor grammar is not a crime?
Oh, gee…
Darn! Too bad.
If so you would have been behind bars long ago. For life.
(I even gave you a pass at that horrific run-on sentence – the one beginning with "I wonder how many people…".
Ever hear of proper syntax and punctuation?
So, (if you really are Ezz) tell me, did you pass English 101 in college? How?
Inquiring minds want to know.
To Just Wonderin’, Mon.12/20/10 22:34 I don"t believe Mr Miller was sitting an English exam,so no need to grade his grammar skills.Mr Miller was simply trying to get his point across, and I am sure that he did.I get the impression from your post that you also understood what he was saying .However you choose to belittle Ezzard rather than taking issue with his point of view.Sad indeed.
I can only assume that Mr. Miller, upon hearing the news that the Attorney General disagreed with his less-than-brilliant legal analysis, reverted to drink to ease the pain of the defeat, and then decided to write that response. At least that’s what I hope happened because if that’s the way a university-educated legislatorwho wishes to become Premier writes, this country has a lot more problems than just disrespectful journalists.
I, for one, profited from Mr. Miller’s post. I had a $5 bet that he didn’t write "View from the Southeast Corner" by himself as it lacked his distinctive style.
I am so glad this ridiculous case is dropped. We cannot allow our freedoms to be squashed by these bullies.
There is a lot of news (contrary to public opinion) it is terrible much of it cannot be reported on.
I hope more members of the press will take a stand like Mr. Fuller and of course CNS. Let’s keep these FOIs coming!
Brent Sweetheart,
There’s way too much love out here for you. Caymanians and X-pats have come together to fight for you. this means only one thing. You sowed some good seeds and you reaped a Harvest! A miracle or miracles! I’m about as grassroots and it gets and I went to bat for you like everybody else. God is with you boy, your heart is in the right place. And" No Weapon formed against you shall prosper." Isaiah 54:17 IT SHALL NOT PROSPER!
Hey Ezzard when yo mess with God’s people this is usually the end result!
Can’t touch them!
There’s no way the AG, Ezzard or Mary Lawrence, Speaker or Not could win with this much love for Brent Fuller in the community.
God bless.
We love you Brent!
Thankfully the AG put a stop to this foolishess!
Now hopefully the "learned" lawmakers can try to focus on what they should…Real Crime!
Note to Ms. Mary and Mr. Miller…."Don’t take yourself so seriously"….even you are sometimes wrong!
Study what is happening in the "world"….Freedom of information….and of the Press is a good thing….embrace it. We the people demand that you do. You work for us!
If you don’t like it that way then get out of the kitchen (Politics).
The Honorable Attorney General, Mr. Sam Bulgin, deserves credit for acting quickly and decisively in this unfortunate matter. His brief statement speaks volumes; however, I, for one, would have appreciated some additional elaboration.
This was an ill-begotten venture from the outset that I believe has done perhaps fatal damage to whatever future political aspirations (if any) the member from North Side, Mr. Ezzard Miller, might have.
I am perplexed by Mr. Miller’s statement upon learning that the Attorney General had rejected his resolution: "I have asked the authorities to prosecute plenty of people that I believe have broken the law before and they usually don’t do it so there is nothing different here."
"Plenty of people"?
Mr. Miller might want to contemplate why the Attorney General (regularly it seems) refuses to move his requests toward prosecution. Obviously Mr. Miller and the Attorney General interpret the law very differently.
In any case, we do not have a perfect ending, since Mr. Miller was not alone in this vote. Eight other members followed his lead. They are on the record with their names attached to Mr. Miller’s misguided motion. I doubt they will follow Mr. Miller on his legislative misadventures again anytime soon . . .
Mr Bulgin did the right thing. Mr Miller and the rest of the LA cronies seem to have no idea how to interpret or make laws!
You are so right!
As soon as they pass some of these cockeyed laws they have to amend them over and over and over and over and….
The Attorney General has done the right thing in regard to this particular farce.
But what about the others? Will the AG now support changes to our criminal law which would make our streets safer, such as ending parole for violent crime and ending concurrent sentences for violent crime?
It is ridiculous that some violent criminals now get shorter sentences than was demanded in the case of Mr. Fuller.
It is ridiculous that our current laws allow a violent criminal who robs 20 people to get the same sentence as a violent criminal who robs one. Where is the deterrent if the penalty is the same no matter how many people the criminals terrify or injure?
Why is this government refusing to get tough on criminals by changing our laws on violent crime? Whose advice are they following and just who is benefiting from our soft on crime laws?
But they are tough on crime, tough as nails! Just try smoking 9 feet from a bar, or bring one ganja seed across the 12-mile territorial limit in your yacht’s ashtray, then you’ll know what tough is! They’ll ruin your life and feel good about it.
Great, finally the right decision! Well done Sam – you’ve done us proud! The travisty that would’ve followed a decision to prosecute would’ve been unimaginable. Thank you for proving that there is some sanity on the island!
p.s who knew Mr Fuller was so handsome 😉