CoP says gang law inadequate

| 11/10/2011

(CNS): The police commissioner says gang legislation passed in the Cayman Islands several years ago is completely inadequate and there has never been a prosecution under it. The islands' top police officer has called for practical legislation instead that he says his officers can use in order to arrest and charge the young men behind the surge in gun crime. Echoing comments made by other senior officers in the RCIPS recently about changes needed to the firearms law, David Baines wants to see the burden of proof switched from prosecutors to defendants under the country’s gun laws and officers given the ability to make warrantless searches whenever and wherever they have grounds to suspect guns are hidden. (Photo Dennie Warren Jr)

Speaking at a press briefing on Friday with visiting senior officers from the UK, the commissioner of police (CoP) spoke about the challenges of arresting gang members under current legislation. Baines spoke about the problem of the gang laws, which includes provisions that specific tattooes or colours can deem people to be gang members. He said trying to arrest these gang members for congregating was very difficult as it was not possible to prove they are planning to commit a criminal act. Baines said the law was insufficient.

“There has not been a single prosecution under gang legislation,” he said.

Baines spoke about amending thefirearms law to give police more practical legislation that officers can use to arrest and charge people. The barriers presented by the need for warrants before police can search homes where they suspect guns may be hidden needed to be addressed, he said. Baines pointed out that police can search homes without a warrant when they suspect drugs could be at a property but they do not have the same powers in relation to illegal guns.

He also said in circumstances where firearms are found at a premises the police must prove that the suspect is the owner or user of the guns. The commissioner said that the burden of proof needs to switch so the suspect has to explain the presence of any weapons rather than the prosecution having to prove the weapons belong to, or are being used by, the resident of the place where they are found.

Baines pointed to the importance of the right legislation as he said all of the social efforts, the extra cash for the police and other moves to fight crime would be “meaningless” if the police could not carry out their investigations lawfully.

Both the police and legislators have been discussing possible amendments, the commissioner revealed, and recommendations have gone to the attorney general. Baines said he hoped the changes would come soon. “There is no lack of appetite to move forward on this,” he added.

However, in the local legal profession a number of attorneys have voiced concerns about the trend towards altering of laws that trample on the public’s rights and freedoms in order to increase the chances of the prosecution getting a conviction. Many say that the legislation is not the problem but it is the work of the police and prosecutors which needs to improve.

One local attorney expressed the views of a number of lawyers when he said that changing laws to aid weak prosecution and poor police investigations will not stop the crime, just reduce the people’s rights.

“Oppressive laws can only lead to further and more extreme acts of criminality,” Peter Pollack warned. He pointed out that the problem of passing such an amendment would be unveiled once an innocent friend, relative or child is arrested.

“If a firearm is found on a bus, is everyone to be arrested or just the driver?” the lawyer asked rhetorically as he pointed out the potential pitfalls in this type of legislation if it were to be passed. “If a firearm is found in a community meeting is everyone to be arrested or just the community leader? If  the commissioner and 14 UK officers are on a North Sound cruise and an illegal firearm is discovered, are all to be arrested? We are already on the slippery slope and the leaders of non-performing institutions should be stepping aside instead of deflecting poor performance,” he added.

Pollack questioned the appearance of legality when the checks and balances of an experienced judiciary are pushed aside in favour of laws that will ultimately lead to suspicion, then conviction. “The adoption of the German or Zimbabwean model will not lead to a more transparent or civil society,” he said. “Any legislator approving this amendment is endorsing the performance of the present commissioner.”

The criticisms of the institutions have come hard and fast recently after a number of acquittals in gang related killings and fatal shootings, which some say were the result of either poor evidence gathering or poor presentation of the cases.

Both the commissioner and the governor have spoken publicly on the need to review how evidence is being gathered and preserved and how police cases are being put together and ultimately presented in the courts. The authorities have suggested that an expert from the Canadian police service will be coming to Cayman in the near future to review those elements of criminal cases and the commissioner is also seeking to recruit forensic experts into the RCIPS.

Category: Crime

Comments (43)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    Im a young man from the district of west bay and ithink the gang laws are pointless because these so called gangs in cayman or so disorganized they shouldnt even be called a gang, they have no specific colors no specific hand shake or tattoos, so why arrest someone because of a number or sign on him where you have people that have no criminal record and a nice job, does not smoke ganja and covered in tattoos of skulls and numbers that may have truthfull meaning them besides being in a gang. The police may even be labelling innocent people as gangmembers because of being related to a certain individual, or being a life long neighbour. The government needs to stop being so XXXX maybe take all the money they are XXXX and support these individuals who need money and guidance, give them jobs and stop screwing people records over a spliff of ganja for 7 years maybe the crime will decrease. If each one of these guys had a steady job of lets say making 2 grand a year they would be no robberies, theft, burglaries.

     

    The police cannot stop all crime in the cayman islands because there will always be personal issues between people and the community will never know when someone is going to kill some because of an altercation. I know majority of these individuals that are in the spot light and being labelled as so called gang members are not intended trouble makers or bullies or terrorist just because they woke up one morning and felt this way, its because they had a rough life and resorting to selling cocaine and other drugs just to survive even robberies, and most of them did not graduate school or took it seriously because lack of their peers supervision. I feel we need more things to do in the community and keep the people active, not police shutting down every private social event because of loud music or just people gathering, allow more concerts, festivals, shows..Something to keep the community going and stop dwelling on the past and crying over sh*t weve created

  2. Anonymous says:

     

    Baines is CORRECT. The law  is inadequate . It seems you got  to see the young man in hi hand to  proof that he may need to be searched. The LAw in  our land  breathe so muchc LAWLESSness

     

    But here i the problem Cayman:  If   we continue to allow the one TV station we have in this  

    country to force out to buy channels that we do not want in our homes. then we will continue to " hold the bag"   You can bet your  dollar  on the fact that it seems that 7 out of every 10 shows on TV   that is coming into our  childs homes, bedroom and then of course into therir HEADS   is  "lined" with  lots of  Sex , and  Anger, Corruption and Voilience.

     

    How andd when do  want this voilence to stop  breathing ?

    When will our  TV station allow families to PICK ONLY the channel they want  in their package and pay for  them ONLY?

     

    When will we have more informative, educational channels like HGTV, DIY, Animal Kingdom,   and  Clean movies ( free of  anger, voilence, guns, vulgarity ) 

    Until we realise that young men an women  Learn what they SEE also , then our  society will  continue the hate and  downward  slide. 

    We will continue to pay Baines , Scotland Yard, Canadian Yard , the Helicopter, an 25 other UK police . A total of  $100,000  a MONTH easily.

    No matter which young man is the culprit :  it means that is young men out there  who is backing guns, full of hate , and murder  and  feels they should  not work for a honest living but get quick money. And this culture and way of thinking   DID NOT fall out of the sky

  3. Chris says:

    Its official. Baines is out to lunch!

    Its impossible to prove a negative.

    How can you prove you didnt know something?

    Imagine someone slipping a gun into your child's bag at school then reporting it to a teacher??

    Can you imagine the trama and legal fees etc to prove that your child is innocent and knew nothing about the weapon??

    This is very dangerous ground the commissioner is treading on. In an effort to make his life easy he will only make life a lot harder for the rest of us.

     

  4. Anonymous says:

    The people of Cayman have no confidence in Baines. Violent street crime is way up under his watch and not improving (of course he'll pull some stats to show that relative to Afghanistan Cayman is very safe). The sad part is if it were a Caymanian Police Commisioner in his seat he would have been replaced ages ago by the powers that be yet this incompetent blame caster is still secure in his position and able to cruise around on his boat during office hours as part of an "official programme".

  5. Anonymous says:

    Baines is clearly out of his depth and is resorting to suggestions that would give the police absolute authority and leave no protection for civilians if these proposed amendments are enacted and then abused.

  6. Dennie Warren Jr. says:

    Really? Is that policing by consent or imperial rule? How will law-abiding persons be protected against someone setting them up?

    • Anonymous says:

      Reply to Really…

      Really…then how law abiding would you and your family be if a gun is found in your home.

      Don't think the defence ''someone is trying to set me up would work''

      It would have to have been put there by one of your family or a friend.

      Shouldn't be too hard for you to narrow it down and turn the person in.

       

      • Dennie Warren Jr. says:

        Re: “Don't think the defence ''someone is trying to set me up would work''”

        So, you and your spouse live in a home with two kids of your own.  Your son and daughter are 16 and 17 years of age, respectively.  At various time the friends of your kids visit to play video games, etc., because you’re the best parents in the Cayman Islands.  However, you discover a firearm in your car garage.  Who should be held responsible?  You? Your spouse? Your son? Your daughter? Some of your kid’s friends? All of your kid’s friends?  Or all of the above?

        How will you prove you’re innocent?  What happens when your employer starts considering whether it’s best to keep you around? Will such a question mark over the kids head prevent them from getting a scholarship in the near future?  Would it prevent them from being a Grand Court Judge, or the Attorney General, or the Auditor General?

      • Flipper says:

        Ummh, not really – you appear a bit too slow to understand, so allow me to explain step by step:

        1.  i take a gun and throw it into your car simply because you sound like a nitwit

        2.  i call police and let them know that as a concerned citizen i just passed a car and saw a gun sticking out of it

        3.  police comes over, waits for you to go to your car, and arrests you

        4.  good luck proving that the gun is not yours…

        get it now?

  7. Anonymous says:

    What more does the RCIPS want our first born this is ridiculous absolutely ridiculous the eroding of our fudamental rights and freedoms will lead to a more extreme society or is that  the real plan all along.  Our XXXX politicians are trailing along with this like a bunch of hyeenas looking to get a mouth full to keep their guts full. While people out here are at the mercy out this foreign occupation police force.

  8. Anonymous says:

    A bit late in the day however, the police are pretty much toothless when it comes to what they have to protect themselves or what they can legally do. so come on mac give the force some teeth and allow them to search at least without a warrant when they suspect guns on the property. please? its a move in the right direction

    • Anonymous says:

      Reply to a bit late in the day.

      I agree. Don't understand the thumbs down on this comment…

      They can search without a warrant for drugs….Why do people not want them

      to search without a warrant for guns? Someone please englighten me on this point

      People have commented they don't like the idea of having to prove the gun is not yours..

      if one is found..

      When they search without a warrant and find drugs…does the homeowner have to

      prove the drugs are not his….?I don't know the law on that one.

      Guns need to be taken out of circulation too many murders have happened, one

      would think people would be glad to get them off the street and out of these young

      guys hands.

       

      • Dennie Warren Jr. says:

        Abraham Intercedes for Sodom:

        Genesis 18:23-25 & 32 reads: "Abraham came near and said, “Would You also destroy the righteous with the wicked? …would You also destroy the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous that were in it? …Suppose ten should be found there?” And He [the Lord] said, “I will not destroy it for the sake of ten."

        Separately, "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", expressed by the English jurist William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England, published in the 1760s.

        • Anonymous says:

          Wow, Dennie, your argument actually nails the coffin shut, because ten righteous couldn't be found and Sodom ended up being burnt by God!   

           

          So, to answer the question you proffer, then I guess everyone is deemed guilty, the parents, the children and the children's friends???  Just asking for logic.

  9. rupert says:

    I believe that CoP Baines, the Governor and Makeeva need to get a couple of helicopter gun ships, two million rounds and run sorties 24 hours a day, spraying parts of West Bay, Prospect and East End.  Spray areas like you spray for mosquitos.  THAT will show 'em … Then go lot by lot with metal detectors looking for guns.  If you find one gun, by association the WHOLE District is guilty by the Baines rule.  Heil Baines.

  10. Whodatis says:

    Well, one thing is for certain, and that it is that the current method of doing things is not working.

    We have seen dozens of news reports of the most outrageous courtroom proceedings and we must approach the issue from another angle.

    The unsettling fact is that this country is currently awash with illegal firearms – and I would forward a guess that 99.9% of the handlers of said illegal firearms are in fact criminals.

    I for one want to see as many as possible of these individuals put away or brought to justice. (Actually, I am more concerned with the removal and destruction of the illegal firearms than anything else. Let them fight it out like real men and not the cowardly, trigger-happy punks that they really are.)

    * Lastly, with such a low rate of wrongfully arrested / tried individuals (in relation to illegal firearms) in our community it is clear to see that the vocal objectors are likely more concerned with the prospective dent in their wallets than the personal freedoms of the wider public.

    " Buses … community meetings … police on a boat …" – give me a break will ya?!

    ** If the public was aware of just how many of our recently murdered and murdering' members of our community have escaped previous convictions due to our weak laws in this regard many of us would be singing another tune.

    (Enter the hypotheticals in 3 … 2 … 1)

  11. Anonymous says:

    As someone who recently served as juror, I find it imperative to state publicly that the prosecution and their "expert" witnesses are lacking at best.  These are not people from abroad, nor are they "recent" experts but seasoned, knowledgeable veterans.  The "evidence" that they produce is of such shoddy quality that it is easy for the defense to poke holes all over it. Common sense questions and information is not provided, making them look foolish and unprepared. These are people who have no training in giving evidence in can barely string a sentence together as it relates to their supposed "expertise".

    The whole point of "innocent until proven guilty" is because the state (meaning the police,the prosecution, etc) have at their disposable many more resources than the average person.  In other words, the balance is already tipped towards the state because of their access to these "experts" and their fountain of information.

    What Mr. Baines and the DPP need to do is concentrate on getting their house in order so that their people are not doing the defense's job for them!  The fact that they are being outsmarted by a bunch of dumbasses who post incriminating photos on social media websites for the world to see is an indication of how far we have left to go in developing a credible justice system.

     

  12. Anonymous says:

    What is this?  Are we becoming a Police State,  what little rights we have will become non existent and all these new laws are selectively being enforced because of what is mentioned by Mr. Polack "legislation isnot the problem but it is the work of the police and prosecutors which needs to improve".

  13. Anonymous says:

    The Police already have the power to search without warrants. All they have to do is say they think drugs are on the premises – and if they find a gun – voila! New laws reducing our rights further are NOT NEEDED.

    Also, a warrant in Cayman need only be signed by a JP – and the Police can get one in 5 minutes – the CoP is making excuses for his and his officers' ineptitude.

    All Caymanians need to fight against this man's consistent advocacy of eroding our fundamental rights.

    We have already lost the right to remain silent. Now we are to be guilty before proven innocent?

    All because the Police and Crown prosecutors cannot do their jobs? To anyone who supports this change in legislation, I urge you to go down to the Courts and to listen to some of the cases brought. You will see the shoddy Police work and lackluster prosecution that even Judges comment on.

    In the interests of human rights and justice, all accused parties must remain innocent until proven guilty – beyond a reasonable doubt.

     

  14. UKer says:

    Its interesting to see him proposing something he couldn't do in England (search without warrant) where we have far more gun crimes, gangs and organised crime.  I worry about this.  Personally I don't think ANY search should be conducted without warrant.  And also Mr Baines how about getting the Caymanian police the exact same training as the UK police?  The few weeks they do here is barely comparable let alone adequate.  And how about (real) enforcement of PACE, as opposed to pretending the force use it here?  Perhaps if the proper standards and regulations were in place here things would run differently.

  15. Anonymous says:

    I seen about 10 Jamaicans wearing Green the other day posed off in town.. I wonder if the RCIPS are aware of the growing amount of gang activity along with these foreigners!

    Remember they come from a well known Gang style Life and they come here and bring it as you can see the root of the problem is coming from where we have the MOST expats on island JAMAICA!

    • Anonymous says:

      To 11:43 :HATER: Why are you trying to stir up hate and animosity between the residents of these island and jamaicans. Aren't they free to wear red or green or black or blue or any other colour? Don't expose how shallow and ignorant you are on a public media. Dont deposit you hatemongering on the site. You sound like you are one of those people who would like to trample Jamaicans under your feet. This is the 21st century there no place for those kind of demeaning  attitude and expressions. You probably think that divisivness is a good thing in a multirational society but go back and read history and see what this caused among intolerant people. Google Bosnia, Yugaslovia, Viet Nam ,East Timor etc. Do you want to see those tribalist trend in Cayman? Do some more reading and imagine you and your family living in one of those intolerant societies. Then you can sell the idea to your friends if you like it. If you like it then you can tell us on this site.

  16. Anonymous says:

    And you bring this up now?  After how long on the job?  Why do you wait for five murders to be committed before blaming the law?

     

  17. Raffaelle says:

    The erosion of our rights has begun Cayman Gang violence is short term tyranny last alot longer. Our freedom is more important  Mr Baines than your good idea. Every frigging time we have these crime situations all we get is either more laws or more money to cover up for some people's incompetence or in ability to do what they are overpaid to do. No more excuses Sir How about you make some changes at the management level of the RCIPS or is that too hard for you to do. Blame ,Excuse, Lies"  our new motto.

  18. Not PPM or Big Mac says:

    Good points raised by Mr Pollack. What if your son, your friend, your son’s friend, or even a friend of a friend decides to hide a gun in your house. Will you standing in court saying “I don’t know where this came from” be enough to keep YOU out of jail for 10 years?

    While we all want tougher laws to prevent crime and gangs,these proposals definitely needs proper review and should not be rushed through.

    • Anonymous says:

      No you stand up in court and say its my son's gun.

      • Anonymous says:

        Reply to no you stand up..

        That's right…The point some of the above posters are  trying to make is….

        YOU stand up and say  WHO !! the owner of the gun is!!

        Too many people are just ''playing dumb''  and noone will speak up against

        friends or family….We have seen the results of this ''silence''

        • Anonymous says:

          And if you have the misfortune genuinely not to know whose the gun is?  10 years inside.  Alternatively you make up a name and that person gets 10 years inside.  Unless of course they find someone else to blame…  A similar investigation policy was employed by witch hunters in the 17th Century.

          You really haven't thought this through have you?

      • Anonymous says:

        To which you'll be met with the answer "Well you would say that wouldn't you?  That proves nothing.".  And when your son says the same thing are you both convicted? Assuming no conspiricy between the two of you, by definition one of you must be innocent, and with neither of you able to 'prove' your innocence at least one innocent person will be locked up for 10 years.

        Dummy.

    • Anonymous says:

      Pollack is absolutely wrong –  and the point is, that up until now if your son's friend hides a gun in your house, you can get away with saying 'I've never seen that before, and I have no idea where it's from' wheras if you have to prove you have no connection, you'll have to say 'my son's friend brought it into the house' – and the police have leads to follow. Of course, the point should be, why are you letting your son mix with people who carry guns? 

      • Not PPM or Big Mac says:

        Neither one of you are getting the point. The point is that if you don’ know who planted the gun, how do you prove your innocence and the fact that the gun belongs to someone else? Your son, in this example, may also not know his friend planted a gun in your house. That’s the problem with proposing that the burden of proof should be on the accused – it is going too far and away from the basic principle of innocent until proven guilty. I agree with no warrants needed where the police has grounds to suspect the presence of an illegal firearm, but, if they find one, they need to proove it is yours. Otherwise, you and or your son will be put away for 10 years because you can’t prove it wasn’t yours.

        • Anonymous says:

          Then this is the deal breaker in the proposed legislation:

           

          "Otherwise, you and or your son will be put away for 10 years because you can't prove it wasn't yours."

           

           

        • Anonymous says:

          Well if a gun is found in your house and it's not yours…..

          It either belongs to your son or his friend you speak of….

          Your son ''could'' be guilty of hiding it…he just won't admit it to you….

          or he could know his friend hid it…and won't admit it

          On this island people will never believe their child associates with these gangs

          or in their hearts they know but look the other way and pretend it's not so..

          if a lot of families would take off the blinders and see what their children are really

          up to it would go a long way to keeping their children out of this sort of trouble.

           

    • Anonymous says:

      Reply to Good Points

      Well if  your friend hides a gun in your house you would probably know who did it, and

      then it would be your responsibility to give them up to the police, and if you don't then

      you  should pay the price.

      The attorneys saying if a gun was found in a bus or meeting hall or other public place

      should all there be charged? Now the attorneys are carrying it to extremes.  That

      comment is ridiculous.

      They are afraid of trampling on peoples rights????  What a bunch of B.S. Do the

      people that these criminals have shot..injured or murdered  not have any rights?

      If there had been a law to search private homes when  guns were  suspected to be there

      some of these murders may have been prevented by taking weapons out of

      circulation and throwing these guys in jail.

      There being a law to search for drugs without a warrant is a good thing….but not

      having the same law for gun searches is not right.  The powers that be should be

      just as concerned with having all these guns on the street as they are about

      drugs on the street.

       

  19. Mr.R says:

    The law really need to change,the police need more power there hands are tied and you all dont see that,every one beaten the RCIP and dont see that they can do so much and no more.Mr commissioner am happy you see that but alot more amending needed in the law and if that dont change then you all are heading into trouble.The prosecutor needs a change to.

    • Anonymous says:

      Rubbish, this is just another rant by the CoP to cover up the fact that his officers can't find and secure evidence to produce convictions. Right now a lot of them are probably so disillusioned by his leadership they just can't be bothered.

      If Mr Baines had his way it would be enough for an RCIPS officer to put handcuffs on a suspect to get them 10 years in Northward but that's not the way the law works.

      I'm not saying that some laws don't need changing but you have to be careful. Knee jerk legislation is going to fall foul of ECHR, which will in turn undermine the objectives of the changes and increase the crime problems.

      This all goes back to Operation Tempura and people who bent the rules because they couldn't produce the evidence they needed to justify their existence and it cost the Cayman Islands how much???????????? In fact much of the crime problem we have now is a result of the fiasco that removed a dedicated CoP and drove numerous other experienced officers off the islands at a time when their skills we really needed.

  20. Anonymous says:

    He wants to do UK style policing with UK style bans on gun owership and then this? He'd never propose such a thing in the UK. Basically he proposes the worst of all worlds–a police state.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Prime Minister Micheal Manley of Jamaica created legislation that made a person arrested on gun crimes guilty until proven innocent. Once you were arrested on suspicion of a crime involving guns you were considered guilty until you proved your innocence.

    To the best of my knowledge this legislation had no effect on criminal activity involving guns and only served to fill the prisons with many people who may be innocent but unable to prove it. The drug trade and gun crimes go hand in hand, throw in some political influence and the criminals could not care less about what legislation you make to counter them.

    I realize the Police need some teeth in order to bite the criminals, but  making them guilty until they prove their innocence dont look like a solution to me, and may in fact emcourage the Police to make arrests just to make themselves look good.

    • Empty Chair says:

      Yea and that law made a Caymanian spend many years in a Jamaican jail for a murder that was committed even though he was not in Jamaica the time of the murder. He was arrested along with some people that had a gun that was used in a murder and after many years of legal battles and negotiations between the Prime Minister of Jamaica and the then Leader of Government Business, was the Caymanian gentleman released, so I don't think that a law that says if you are found with a gun that you are guilty until proven innicent, BUT when found guilty I whole heartedly agree that the punishment should be very severe!

  22. Anonymous says:

    Commissioner Baines is absolutely right about our anti-gang legislation being useless. We do not need to re-invent the wheel. The US and other countries have legislation aimed at organised crime in general which is very effective against gang leaders. The  only problem is that certain political leaders might also be threatened if we ever tried to suppress organised crime in general.

    I disagree with reversing the burden of proof on gun crimes. That is going too far.

    I do agree with extending the search without warrant provisions that already apply to drug offences to gun offences.

    • Anonymous says:

      I agree with your comments. How far do they expect to go?

      And, what about Human Rights violations? As far as I can recall this would not be considered reasonable and proportionate and against the right to fair trial etc to have to prove your innocence. 

      Do people realise what will happen if this is allowed? A cop who may not like an innocent family member of an alleged gang member could also be arrested for 'association' and then have to prove their innocence, do people realise how difficult and subjective that could be?

      Reversing the burden of proof will undermine the rights of citizens and will only encouragethe Legal Department and RCIPS to continue to take the easiest path.

      Also, when I read the legislation enacted in 2005, AGAIN IN RESPONSE TO ALLEGED, mis-directed attack on the AG, the law now allows the police to make arrest of gangs and associations of gangs much easier. I really hope they consider this before going any further. Using the law to simply 'lock' people up will not solve this problem. The change in laws in 2005 did not help and until the community and police address this issue it will continue and will escalate.

       

      As much as I want to see this gang problem addressed and resolved, please do not infringe on my right asa citizen to have such laws with such serious mandatory sentences put into law. It goes without saying that when the law has mandatory 10 year sentences already in place, it is even more important to have the police and prosecutors prove their case to ensure the law is applied fairly.

    • Castor says:

      The police have absolutely no right to be in your house regardless, with out a warrant or invitation. End of story There has to be a reasonable, lawful reason, then a visit to the judge, then a warrant, then a raid. Very Simple. As much as we all abhor drugs it should not be that the police can raid your house because they "think" there may be drugs is wrong. The police need to do their homework, which they don't do now!

    • Anonymous says:

      Yep, I'm with you. Much as I'm happy to beat on the RCIP and the hapless, ineffective and to a large extent corrupt/misguided officers, the problem goes deeper than just the police. The main issue I feel is that Cayman is too small to effectively prosecute and 'gang leaders/members' because everyone knows everyone else, and depite the rhetoric, no one will stand up and do the right thing. I appreciate part of the apprehension comes from potential leaks within the police, but real citizens concerned for the safety and future of Cayman should put that aside, and supply the information required. The TIPS line is anonymous, you all know at least one cop you trust, or pick a brand new expat. New officers from (certain) overseas juridictions are simply not interested in local petty politics, and are usually here to police, until they invariably get sidelined and driven out.

      This is down to you Cayman, not tjust the police, not just the politicians. bring in all the 'specialist squads' you want, but you know in your heart that protecting your own, be they good or bad, comes above the greater good.