The Big Man Break

| 27/10/2014

The Criminal Procedure Code of the Cayman Islands sets out offences which allow the police to arrest people without a warrant and those crimes which are not. It is a usefulguide for those UK policemen hell bent on arresting a judge if the government is to avoid paying out millions of dollars. Nearly all offences are in fact arrestable but for a few exceptions.

Public officials arrested for fraud, neglect of official duty or disobedience of lawful duty are specially exempted from arrest and the public humiliation that other citizens have to regularly suffer.

Some public officials are arrested and in one unfortunate incident a policeman was found thereafter hanging from a tree Wilderness Drive. Others may end up on a yacht in the North Sound waiting for their summons to arrive.

There is no official policy on apology or notice of innocence or compensation if you are found innocent after a time before the courts. You have to return to society and endure whispers and the cutting of eyes as you pass by. Just this week a young man who was accused of complicity in murder and his bail objected to by the DPP suddenly found that he was discharged from the Grand Court and all charges dropped. This is also true for a traffic charge or minor offence. This is a frequent occurrence that should be studied to avoid repetition. More effort has to go into decisions on who is to be charged.

The Premier and Minister of Home Affairs has been silent on these matters that affect some of the people and their family that will have a decision at the ballot box.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Viewpoint

Comments (23)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. marius voiculescu says:

    I find it somewhat disheartening to see all these negative comments directed at Mr. Polack.  XXXX, there is no need for this sort of thing.  The fact of the matter is that Mr. Polack's position is and always has been quite clear – he stands with and supports 99% of the people of these islands against corrupt government and government officials, against the selective use of laws, against the lack of transparency in government, against officials who do not earn their salaries and use their positions to further their own aims, against a bureaucracy and its officials that are not accountable to anyone, against the offices of the AG, DPP which fail spectacularly far more often than not, etc.  Though this may not have been Mr. Polack's clearest viewpoint, especially to the uninitiated, its title does provide a clear clue as to the content and message…  Ultimately, these islands require people such as Mr. Polack to stick their necks out for the greater good of others.  I would think that the very least he deserves is a little bit of respect even in times when you may not necessarily agree and/or understand.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Sounds like a pitch for McKeeva following his acquittal, and against Alden. Misconceived and politically motivated. 

  3. Anonymous says:

    Excellent article Peter. Others, Go gnash your remaining tooth stubs and tone down on your rhetoric and hostility! Truth requires no excuse, nor does it require an apology!

  4. Anonymous says:

    No-one is ever "found innocent".  So that bit was nonsense.  The rest was worse.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Peter, as a criminal defence attorney you must be aware that a jury finding of "not guilty" does not necessarily mean that the defendant was actually innocent or that a public apology or compensation is in order. It only means that there was insufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt in the opinion of the jury.  

    I don't understand what you mean by "public officials arrested for fraud, neglect of official duty or disobedience of lawful duty are specially exempted from arrest…". Clearly, if they were arrested it means they were not specially exempted from arrest. Did you mean that they were arrested unlawfully because there is supposedly some Law that exempts them from arrest for these offences? What Law is that, Peter? Section 29 of the Anti-Corruption Law (which covers public officials and MLAs) makes clear that a person who a constable reasonably suspects has committed any of the offences under that Law (which include fraud and breach of duty) is subject to arrest.

    What exactly was the point of your Viewpoint, again?         

     

    • Anonymous says:

      The point? Marketing to the legally illiterate?

    • Anonymous says:

      I have now had a look at Schedule 1 to the Criminal Procedure Code that Peter is referencing. All Schedule 1 is saying is that those offences are not arrestable without a warrant, notthat they are not arrestable at all. It helps if you read (a) the heading of the relevant column together with (b) section 14(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code which reads: "Subject to any other law, no person shall be arrested without a warrant otherwise than in connection with an offence prescribed in Schedule 1 as an arrestable offence". And just in case you were wondering, an MLA is not a "public officer" (as the Schedule says) or "public official" (as Peter misquoted it).

      Peter, with your many years at the criminal bar I should not have to tutor you on these points.       

  6. Hewlett says:

    Hey! Peter used his keyboard again to make words.

     

  7. anonymous says:

    Is this another government financial report? It makes no apparent sense, has little worth and it is aimed at nobody in particular.

  8. anonymous says:

    CNS …. any news on that WTF button?

  9. Anonymous says:

    Thanks Mr. Pollack for your willingness to exercise your right of free speech and speak up the majority exercising their right to be silent and will benefit from your efforts, as I do believe an awakening will happen soon and those in their comfortable positions will realise the silence had actually affected their other, crucial rights. Can't wait for the awakening!

    • anonymous says:

      This awakening? Does it mean that we will now have to be in to work on time and work a full week?

      • Anonymous says:

        If that's what you need yes…maybe you could have your 'whatever am stimulant' you use, but too many Caymanians are sleeping with eyes wide open when it comes to what's happening, so yes the awakening. Are you up now?

    • Anonymous says:

      Are we going to get taken up in the sky again? To be honest, I was a little disappointed with the last one.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Is this a serious post or the ramblings of a mad person? Are you seriously saying that the police officer that was arrested was done so unlawfully?. I think you'll find Blackmail is an arrestable offence, regardless of occupation. If you are implying that the arrest was unlawful, this is the first any of us have heard of it. It does not make mention of this in the review by Bermuda Police either. I think Mr Polack's post is at best poorly written and at worst highly inflammatory. It appears that Polack has a bee in his bonnet about UK police. Why?

  11. Anonymous says:

    Is there a Rosetta Stone for this that will be issued later, or is this really all that he has to say?

    • Anonymous says:

      It is pretty much garbage.

    • Anonymous says:

      Sounds to me like he's laying out the facts.  Read again.

      • anonymous says:

        I just did. It's still a whole heap of nothing.

      • Anonymous says:

        The facts of what exactly? It sounds like rambling to me having read it a number of times.

      • anonymous says:

        Sounds like he is trying to lay down some sort of basis for a political career. 

        Or at least lay the basis for the right to enter politics.

        Either way, the "Manley style" overtones, the Anti UK / anti capitalist slant can only take you "pon de road" of which, you are fully aware, takes a long time to return back, if ever.

         

    • Anonymous says:

      I think there are websites that translate bollocks into English, but this sort of stuff would probably need more specialist proprietary translation software.