By Charlesworth C. M. Tabor, Attorney-at-Law
Over the last few weeks our beloved country has been bombarded with the news of the laceny of over $3 million from the Customs Department, the admission by the Prime Minister that his signature was forged in the said larceny and the subsequent shooting of Customs officer, Cornell Benjamin, who was conducting an investigation into the larceny.
This outrageous larceny of the funds of the people of Antigua and Barbuda was first reported to the nation by the Prime Minister himself. The Prime Minister being the settlor and overseer of our fair State, made it abundantly clear that all he is interested in is the return of the money. He showed no concern for the fact that a most heinous criminal offence was involved, that is to say, the forgery of his own signature. No, all he is concerned about is the return of the money and then the matter can be quietly swept under the rug.
One should note here, that the Prime Minister was way out of line to make that call since wheteh a matter proceed to prosecution is not for him to determine. We are still a country of laws where the Rule of Law prevails.
My main concern, though, in this sordid and sad state of affairs; is the wrong and misguided view of both the Commissioner of Police and the Comptroller of Customs.
On Observer AM on the 18 December, 2019 the Commissioner of Police, Atlee Rodney, made the startling statement that the Police is only concerned about the shooting and I dearsay the attempted murder of Mr. Cornell Benjamin. They are not concerned with the crimes of larceny at the Customs Department and the forgery of the signature of the Prime Minister. Those serious crimes should be left to the Customs Department. The Police Act Chapter 330 of the Laws of Antigua and Barbuda gives the Police the mandate for the provision and detection of crime in Antigua and Barbuda. The Police is therefore failing to undertake in earnest the duty imposed upon it by statute to detect and solve crimes on the island.
Now, with respect to Raju Boddu the Comptroller of Customs, his only concern like the Prime Minister is for the recovery of the funds. As he noted on 15 November, 2019 in Pointe Express “We are putting everything in proper legal perspective so that, when we launch the claim for recovery, there are no legal pains to contend with.”
My dear readers the Comptroller of Customs like the Commissioner of Police clearly does not understand his role with respect to the crimes committed. The Customs (Control and
Management) (Amendment) Act, 2013 gives authority to the Comptroller of Customs to
investigate and punish minor infractions as they relate to the Customs Department. In that regard, section 137 of the Act gives the Comptroller the power to impose administrative penalties for such minor infractions. However, if the infractions committed are serious criminal offences which attract a sentence of imprisonment, the matter is outside of the purview of the Comptroller of Customs and must be handled by the Police.
To reiterate, the offences that we are concerned with in this sordid Customs affair are larceny and the forgery of the Prime Minister’s signature. With respect to larceny, section 20 of the Larceny Act, Chapter 241 of the Laws of Antigua and Barbuda indicates that a person found guilty of this offence can be imprisoned with hard labour for a term not exceeding seven (7) years. With respect to forgery, the Forgery Act Chapter 181 of the Laws of Antigua and Barbuda provides for a punishment of imprisonment which ranges from two (2) years to life imprisonment depending on the type of forgery.
The point should be abundantly clear now, that while the Comptroller of Customs can investigate and punish minor offences committed at the Customs Department, he cannot investigate and punish serious offences that carry a punishment on conviction of imprisonment. In the circumstances, therefore, the crimes of larceny and forgery committed at the Customs Department are outside the purview of the Comptroller of Customs. These crimes are for the Police to investigate and bring charges against the perpetrator.
It is apparent, therefore, that both the Commissioner of Police and the Comptroller of Customs are failing in a most serious, unprofessional and egrigeous manner in discharging the duties that their high office demand.
In failing to investigate the crimes of larceny and forgery at the Customs Department, the
Commissioner of Police is WRONG. In his mistaken and misguided view that he has the power to investigate and punish serious crimes committed at the Customs Department, the Comptroller of Customs is WRONG. In the circumstances, I hope reason and logic will prevail and that both the Commissioner of Police and the Comptroller of Customs will abide by the law as they are required to do. The Rule of Law must be honoured.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
Charleswworth Tabor behaving as if He is the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda. Writing this LONG DRAWN out script that He Himself does not understand. The whole WORLD can see that He is a UPP Messenger. Hope to see more report like this one soon. Sir , you will be writing for the next 30 years . Your UPP will never be elected to Office in our lifetime. You should concentrate on attracting Young Intelligent Persons to the UPP. One of your members who ran in the last election against Hon.Max Fernandez called the Snake Pit last night and said that one the UPP downfall is lack of attracting Intelligent Persons to The UPP.
Politics! What appoint the crime that was committed?
MISPRISION OF FELONY: FRAUD – FORGERY – SHOOTING – ALL SERIOUS CRIMES
EC$3, 000, 000 – ‘…Massive Fraud.’
If that which is revealed here represents that which was ‘…reported or alleged,’ then clearly ‘…Comptroller of Customs Raju Boddu and Commissioner of Police Atlee Rodney’ are missing out on some fundamentals.
That which is professionally known, is that it is an offence to know that an offence has been committed, and ‘…deliberately cover up or conceal it.’
It matters not the crime, be it ‘…Fraud or Forgery,’ Law enforcement training classifies such an act as a ‘…Misprision of a Felony’ [Time Immemorial: Common Law].
A Comptroller of Customs shall be mindful of this ‘…criminal act.’
It could also be ‘…Misprision of Duty.’
A Commissioner of Police shall also be mindful of this.
Now, if a Comptroller of Customs said ‘…he is concerned only with the EC$3, 000, 000 Fraud,’ and a Commissioner of Police said ‘…he is concerned only with the Shooting,’ then frankly and fearlessly put, both should remove themselves from their respective positions.
From a professional perspective, their role and function differ.
For instance, in the role of a Comptroller of Customs, his function is ‘…primarily administrative.’
He is responsible for the ‘…Collection of State Revenue’ for tariffs on goods and services.’
Even with an exercisable ‘…Compounding authority’ where minor breaches against the ‘…Customs Management Act’ may be dealt with without ‘…referrals to the law enforcement agency,’ a Comptroller is ‘…still not at liberty to make determinations as to how a reported or publicly revealed ‘…Fraud and Forgery, shall be dealt with.’
Parliament ‘…never aimed such mischief.’
If it were so, there would be no need for a Police Service.
Thus, there would be no need to fight crime, more specifically, ‘…Fraud and Forgery.’
No Sah.
As much as his remunerations might not be negligible, this is far beyond a Comptroller’s pay grade.
Conversely, in the role and function of a Commissioner of Police are;
(i) …Crime prevention;
(ii) …Crime detection; and
(iii) …Criminal prosecution.’
Simply put, a Commissioner has responsibility for the ‘…Prevention and Detection’ of all crimes- against
(a) …The person;
(b) …Property; and
(c) …The State.’
Let it be clearly understood also, that a Commissioner is not at liberty to go into any Department of Government and say he has come to investigate a crime, be it ‘…Fraud or Forgery.’
Notwithstanding, lest a Commissioner be found wanting and seen as ‘…docile; …ineffective or incompetent,’ he shall sharpen his investigative skill, refresh his memory or seek to become more familiar with his ‘…Powers and Duties.’ as contained in the Police Act’ [Chapter 330: Sections 22 and 23].
Not a messenger. No need to shoot. Accept the message.
I am often lost on how someone who was trained on law is so lost when it comes to the same subject. The general public without his training is intelligent enough to know that customs officers have police powers. Section 8 of the customs act makes clear
”
Police powers of officers
For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this Act or any other customs enactment, all
customs officers have the same powers, authorities and privileges as are given by law to members of the Royal Police Force of Antigua and Barbuda.”
PART XIV of the act speaks f the various offences and lists those where not only a fine apply but also prison time. Its truly a shame that someone like Tabor who should know better, constantly proves he is undeserving of the posts he has held. Perhaps the issue is age has caused his brain to be addled
Mr Pompey the customs act gives customs the power to deal with situations the PM described. PM spoke of persons making false declarations in their submission to customs. Section 173 speaks regarding counterfeiting documents, 172 regarding false declarations , 175 fraudulent conversions. All of these carry a possible term of imprisonment of 5 years. Section 224 of the act makes clear:
“224. Officer may prosecute
Any officer or other person authorised by the Comptroller, although not an attorney-at-law, may
prosecute and conduct any information or other proceedings under any customs enactment in
respect of any offence or penalty”
Tenman it is exactly because the crimes you have outlined carry a punishment of a term of imprisonment of 5 years why it is outside the purview of the Comptroller of Customs to investigate (and punish). It is a matter solely for the Police. Please look at the Customs (Control and Management) (Amendment) Act, 2013 and stop confusing yourself and the issue. The issue is very simple.
Tabor we are speaking about the Comptrollers powers to have his officers investigate a matter. You are suggesting that once it calls for a prison sentence he should not even investigate the matter. How would he know this without first investigating? The comptroller has publicly stated the matter is being properly investigated by his team. The part related to court proceedings points out he has the power to appoint an officer (one of his) to handle “prosecute and conduct any information or other proceedings under any customs enactment in respect of any offence or penalty” Note it says any. You suggest they can only investigate crimes that don’t call for imprisonment yet the act makes clear the comptroller can see to it that any breach is prosecuted . Tabor I think we can agree that there may be some issues in an investigation that may call for skills customs may not have. I am yet to see that proved here. You strangely seem to now argue that a man appointed under the UPP admin is untrustworthy and may be involved in aiding criminals. Brethren I don’t recall you saying these things when a few years ago, similar fraud happened involving a Syrian importer in 2012. He was found guilty of false declaration which carries a possible 5 year term. Cat had your tongue then?
“137. Power of the Comptroller to impose administrative penalties. (1) Where in the opinion of the Comptroller, an offence committed under this Act or under any Customs law is not a serious criminal offence or does not attract a sentence of imprisonment, he may proceed against the offender administratively rather than through court proceedings. The Customs (Control and Management) (Amendment) Act, 2013 10 No. 8 of 2013
THE QUESTION TO BE ANSWER ….. IS THIS A A SERIOUS CRIMINAL OFFENCE? DOES THE OFFENCE ATTRACT A SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT? IF YOUR ANSWER TO EITHER QUESTION IS YES, THEN THE COMPTROLLER IS WRONG
007 you are absolutely correct. I wish Tenman had your understanding. Great!
TEN – VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE ‘CMA’
Really not discussing what the PM has said.
Yes Sah, it would be very wrong for him in his persona, to do so.
As a matter of fact, do not know or heard what the ‘PM’ may have said.
Thus, it would be ‘…inappropriate for Rawlston Pompey to harp on whatever the ‘… description’ was.
If it is instructive to know, there are no references to ‘…any Prime Minister’ in the ‘…Customs (Control and Management Act) No. 7 of 1993/No. 3 of 2013].
By Fiat, actually conducted prosecutions on behalf of then ‘…Comptroller of Customs Rolston Samuel.
Do know that the ‘…Administrative Powers’ contained in the Act are exercisable by the Comptroller of Customs [Section 4: CCMA: No 3 of 2013].
There are also two overriding authorities of;
(i) …Cabinet and
(ii) …Minister responsible for Customs.
Also familiar with the ‘…Administration Sections’ aw well [Section 8].
This includes a ‘…Discretionary Compounding Authority.’
Such is not applicable to ‘…serious criminal offences’ such as ‘…Forgery; …Fraud; or …Bribery.’
That which might be so compounded ‘…’includes, ‘…False Declarations or …Unlawful removal of goods, containerized or otherwise, without Customs formalities [Read Observer: July 12, 2012].
Certainly not ‘…Forgery (of signatures) and actually Defrauding Customs.’
These are very serious ‘…Indictable offences.’
Prosecutions may place ‘…an evasive fraudster in double jeopardy, – a fine or custodial sentence and order to pay tariffs.’
Compounding an offence and imposing ‘…administrative fines,’ eliminates criminal trials [Observer News: July 12, 2012].
“The Section states “…The Comptroller of Customns, may as he ‘THINKS FIT” may compound (a) ANY OFFENCE.”
This process involves no “…TRIAL” before a Magistrate. It is “…negotiable” and is simply where the Comptroller may decide not to proceed with “…Criminal proceedings” against an offender. Thus, factors considered are usually making **sments on goods-(subject of the offence); payable Tariffs and the imposition of a “…PENALTY.” The Section states “…The Comptroller of Customns, may as he ‘THINKS FIT” may compound (a) ANY OFFENCE.” RAWLSTON POMPEY » 2012-07-12 08:21 Caribarena
Who decides? Would have done such after an investigation by his officers? The act makes clear he has the power. Agree with you that serious breeches should also be handled via court and include a push for imprisonment
ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION – CRIMINAL PROSECUTION
Ten, this is for your benefit and that of others.
As per caption, these are two distinct issues.
Compounding a ‘…non-serious offence under the ‘CCMA’, is simply using a ‘…an Administrative Discretion.’
Criminal prosecutions are totally different.
If a Comptroller decides to exercise ‘…an Administrative Discretion
,’ the evasive fraudster ‘…may enter into negations with him.’
Have ‘…ACTUALLY’ known of this.
Likened to the Police, the Comptroller of Customs has no ‘…Judicial Powers’ and cannot exercise any such powers.
Speaking from ‘…professional knowledge and practical experience,’ before the Judiciary, it is either a ‘…Guilty Plea’ and the ‘…Facts of the Case’ given by the prosecutor.
If a ‘…Not Guilty Plea,’ then the Case goes to trial.
Witnesses are called to;
(a) …Give evidence;
(b) …Cross examined; and/or
(c) …Re-examined.
Having heard and looked at the ‘…Totality of the Evidence’ adduced by both the ‘…Prosecution and Defence,’ the adjudicator then decides on ‘…Innocence or Guilt.’
If the latter, be it at the ‘…High Court of Justice or the Magistracy,’ there are no negotiations.
Maybe a ‘…Pleas In Mitigation.’
If the accused is unlucky, it might very well be a ‘…long period of incarceration.’
It is that simple Ten.
Even though respectfully discussed, ‘…Why do you insist in fighting up with attorney Charlesworth Tabor?’
Not sure he would let you off the hook Ten.
Johnny Harris it is nice to see that you read the article. However, it seems to me that it is you who do not understand what is written there. The article is not about partisan politics, and Antiguans must learn to rise above partisan politics and not see everything through that lens. The fundamental point of the article is that the Commissioner of Police is duty bound to investigate the crimes of larceny and the forgery of the Prime Minister’s signature in the Customs Department fiasco. It is not for the Commissioner of Police to say that he is only concerned about the shooting. Similarly, it is not for the Comptroller of Customs to say that he will investigate and all he is concerned with is the recovery of the money. We live in a democratic society regulated by laws and the laws must be followed, whether you are the Commissioner of Police or the Comptroller of Customs. The Rule of Law is the hallmark of a democratic society and must prevail. Please re-read the article, without your partisan political lens, and see if you understand the point I making.
Tap lie the Comptroller never stated what you claim. I will agree with you that his statement should have mentioned the other legal recourse (imprisonment). However to conclude this will not be part of his push simply because he did not state it, is false. NOTE: The PM his boss, contrary to your false assertion, went beyond simply just paying back, when he basically stated full action would be taken, regardless of who did it. The applicable laws under the custom act, do call for the possible imposition of prison time. (Boddu) statement follows:
“Although the identity of the culprit has been ascertained, Boddu said the matter is now being approached legally before further steps are taken. We are putting everything in proper legal perspective so that, when
we launch the claim for recovery, there are no legal pains to contend with,” Boddu said.
Simply accusing the individual or group identified is not sufficient, according to Boddu, as it is more
important to cement the case so that when a finger is pointed publicly it would be beyond reasonable doubt.” Pointxpress, 2019-11-15
LET THE LAW SPEAK FOR ITSELF……
“137. Power of the Comptroller to impose administrative penalties. (1) Where in the opinion of the Comptroller, an offence committed under this Act or under any Customs law is not a serious criminal offence or does not attract a sentence of imprisonment, he may proceed against the offender administratively rather than through court proceedings. The Customs (Control and Management) (Amendment) Act, 2013 2 No. 8 of 2013
Yep and who proceeds via court, its the comptroller of customs. The sections under part PART XVII in the substantial act speaks regarding his control over court proceedings eg section 219 and 224
219…
(2) Subject to the powers of the Director of Public Prosecutions and to sub-section (4),
proceedings for prosecution of an offence under any customs enactment, or for condemnation,
shall not be commenced except by order of the Comptroller in writing.
“224. Officer may prosecute
Any officer or other person authorised by the Comptroller, although not an attorney-at-law, may prosecute and conduct any information or other proceedings under any customs enactment in respect of any offence or penalty”
OMG!!! This is where we hv come? Mr. Harris all u take from this commentary is ABLP n UPP? you have no issue or concern on how justice is administered in our little island? Where a prime minister can decide who gets prosecuted for obvious crimes and public servants give up their responsibilities and fall in line against what our laws stipulate.. I hope u Mr. Harris will always idolize the PM and he stays PM for ur lifetime so he can decide ur fate when it comes to justice!!!
Crimes labelled, as “White Collar” have always being treated with “powder puff” gloves, instead of the iron fist, of the Law.
Whether we believe it or not, this type of behavior contributes to the other type of crimes, labelled as “Blue Collar.”
Now, not only does this type of attitude and behavior sends to wrong message, especially to the younger generation(s) who for the most part, emulate what the elders in any Culture does, they the youths usually enhances what they have learnt.
It is no wonder, violent crimes such as armed robberies, shootings, thuggish lifestyles are increasing among the youths.
…Monkey see, monkey do!
…and, this is so FUCKING true!
…because, as I n I say to you;
…a Nation, which prides itself,
…upon, the principles of religion
…and, the morals which it brings
…should be ashamed, to even practice such things!
…believe it, or not
…in the Eyes, of God your Savior
…these types of behavior
…are no more less, than any other sin!
…for, Our habits become Norms!
…our norms, become Our Way Of Life!
…our way if life, will defines Us as A People!
…to wit, said People will define a Culture.
…the Culture, which many emulate
…shall dictate, mos def and predicate
…the DIRECTION’S said People take.
…so, as We leave these types of accepted behavior
…in Our wake!
…make no mistake;
…in generations to come, in Our Nation!
…these planted, nourished and fertilized seeds
…will be Our DESTRUCTION
…like a NINE point FIVE earthquake
…shaking up, Our ras
…because of, Our behavior in the past!
Tenman what are you really talking about? You are so misguided in the view you have expressed it is so SAD. Custom Officers have powers similar to police officers under the Customs Act only or any enactment dealing with customs matters. Customs Officers cannot investigate crimes such as the larceny and forging of the Prime Minister’s signature. That is for the Police to investigate. We need to now use Customs Officers to assist the Police in investigating murders and all the other serious crimes in our society. The Comptroller of Customs (is the head of Customs Tenman) and his powers of investigation for crimes committed at the Customs Department only extend to minor offences and upon the investigation of such offences he can impose administrative penalties. Any serious offences (which involve a punishment of imprisonment) committed at the Customs Department can only be investigated and prosecuted by the Police — not the Comptroller of Customs or any Customs Officer. If you still have a difficulty in understanding this, I am open for a private chat with you. This whole fiasco at the Customs appears to be a BIG cover up, with the Commissioner of Police failing in his duty of crime detection and the Comptroller of Customs over stepping his duty in trying to do what the Police should be doing. In a serious country both the Commissioner of Police and the Comptroller of Customs would be fired over this matter.
The offences I have heard described are covered under the Act. Not only can they investigate matters which fall under their act (Again the officers there have police powers), they can also prosecute persons for breaching offences covered in the act. Check the section regarding offences.
TEN AND TAB – BACK AND FORTH EXCHANGE
No desire to be ‘…Entangled.’
Suffice it to say, attorney Charlesworth Tabor is absolutely correct as far as ‘…investigation into crime is concerned.’
Such is neither a function of the ‘…Comptroller of Customs; …Ministers of Government, nor his officers.’
It has nothing to do with ‘…Forgery of Signatures,’ be it ‘…his or his officers or that of any other person, including a Prime Minister.’
This is ‘…solely a function of the Commissioner of Police and his officers.’
Nonetheless, nothing precludes the Comptroller from launching that which would be ‘…purely internal and administrative.’
Contingent upon the ‘…seriousness of the infraction against ONLY the ‘CCMA,’ he may ‘…exercise a discretionary administrative power.’
Except there is some other agenda, the ‘…Back and Forth Exchange’ seems futile.
Even though there will be no charge of ‘…Cruelty to Animal,’ there may be no more ‘…dead horse beating.’
It would neither ‘…whinny; …move; …bolt; …kick nor gallop.’
NOT QUITE CORRECT – TEN
Not sure who may prevail in the ‘…Back and Forth Exchange’ between yourselves (Tabor/Tenman).
Not Quite Correct- No prosecutions may be instituted or conducted by any officer of Customs except by the ‘…Comptroller of Customs by his Fiat’ (written authorization) [Section 118 & 121: CCMA: No. 7 of 1993].’
…tek WARNING!
…U bettah tek WARNING!
FOR…
…in generations to come, in Our Nation
…these planted, nourished and fertilized seeds
…will be Our own DESTRUCTION
…like a NINE point FIVE earthquake
…shaking up, Our Ras!
Yep, yes Sir! I n I smelt the rumblings, heard the trembling from the Sole of the feet, thus rather than punish ALL, for the Ignorance of some, Mami Wata was gracious enough, even though she had No Power to stop, the SHAKE UP, she can use her power of reflection, thus the INVERSION of the NINE point FIVE, hit you, as a 5.9!
Tek WARNING to Ras, and tap de fuckery and skulduggery! YAH know….!
What bothers me….Two Persons can be trained as an Attorney and interpret a legal paragraph in so many different ways. Something is definitely wrong with the System. That is why politics must intervene in the process. Because Everyone interpret the Law according to Their Political affiliation. Hence, the reason for a court of Law. I have been reading all the postings pertaining to this topic and NONE of you make any sense at All. Very DISAPPOINTED . As a Young Person aspiring to be the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda You Guys are arguing along party Lines. We need FRESH faces in our Political scheme. Please show our Young Persons some Leadership.
Mr. Pompey …Please write in order for the ranking File can understand. Your writings are too COMPLEX.
True Antiguan you are correct in saying that two lawyers could interpret the same piece of legislation differently. That is why there is a hierarchy of courts ending with the Privy Council (in our case) to determine what is the correct interpretation. I will give you a good example of this. I just read online on Yahoo News that while Professor Noah Feldman of Harvard Law School is arguing that President Donald Trump is not actually impeached until the House of Representatives send the articles of impeachment to the Senate, Professor Laurence Tribe, of the same Harvard Law School, is arguing that his colleague is wrong since the House of Representatives have the sole power of impeachment under the Constitution and therefore the President was so impeached on the 18 December, 2019. These are two renown constitutional scholars at Harvard Law School and they disagree as to when the process of impeachment becomes a reality. That is the nature of Law. It is open for interpretation. In the example I just gave, I am squarely on the side of Professor Laurence Tribe. In our example of the Customs scenario and the actions of the Commissioner of Police and the Comptroller of Customs, I am interpreting the law in a very pure and literal sense and not through any political lens. I was encouraged to write the commentary since I am convinced that both the Commissioner of Police and the Comptroller of Customs are wrong in their approach to the matter. My only motivation was to shed some light on the issue. Some issues are above partisan politics and I consider the Customs fiasco to be one such issue. Finally, I am happy to see that you are a young person with serious political ambitions (aspiring to become Prime Minister). Go for it young man and let nothing deter you.
Why be negative?
Here are areas we all agree:
1. This matter is serious and if the evidence bares it out, it should be criminally prosecuted
Here is where there is overall agreement though Tabor disagrees
Customs can carry out an internal investigation. Tabor argues let the police do it all
Here is where most (commentators) disagree with me.
The comproller of customs can initiate a investigation (direct) and prosecution which leads to imprisonment
Here’s where Tabor again stands alone
That customs should not investigate anyone for any of the offences listed in the act which can lead to imprisonment.tellingly he was quiet when exactly this happened in 2012 with cool and smooth broker being only fined and the matter not going to Court.
I also find it interesting that Pompey claims he hldid not hear what the pm said yet the accusation that his signature was forged came publicly from only the PM’s mouth not the comproller of customs, yet Pompey heard this. Anyway at the end of the day we all agree that if the evidence is there to justify the seriousness of what we are hearing, prosecution should push for inprisonment. The disagreement simply lies in what method should be used and who should use those methods
Season greetings and happy new year to you and yours
PM’s BUSINESS AND VIEW
Aint going to pull ‘…Rawlston Pompey’ into what the ‘PM’ said or not said Ten.
Whatever he may have said, it remains his ‘…Business and his View.’
Moreover, expressed ‘…rightly or wrongly; debatable or moot; ……agreeable or disagreeable,’ that is the PM’s freedom.
cant let ratta guard cheese
READING AND UNDERSTANDING – MAKES A READY MAN.
Law itself has always been a ‘…complex subject.’
Was trying to explain something to a friend, and ‘…out of the blue,’ he asked me ‘…Yo’ think my name is ‘…Jacque Cass.”
To practice or enforce it, one ‘…MUST KNOW’ beyond the rudiments.
Simply read for yourself the ‘…Sections of Law,’ provided for enlightenment.
No one really needs a ‘…Law Degree’ to understand it.
Let it be clearly understood that these discussions are not ‘…Judicial.’
Neither those submitted by;
‘…Charlesworth Tabor (practicing attorney);
…Tenman,(Not sure, but seems intelligent enough) nor
…Rawlston Pompey (former law enforcement officer).
Not sure who may take responsibility for ‘…any lack of understanding.’
Certainly not ‘…Rawlston Pompey.’ No Sah.
Tenman I see that you are slowly getting to my position with the concessions in your last post. Now to make it absolutely clear once and for all, I am not saying that Customs cannot investigate any crimes committed there once it involves imprisonment. Yes they can investigate but the matter is really for the police to deal with. Again, that does not preclude Customs involvement. An example will make it easier for you to understand my position. Let us assume that your house is broken into and the crime of theft is committed, yes you as the house owner can do all the investigation that you want (ultimately to assist the police), however, it is for the police to lead the investigation to bring the alleged perpetrator to justice. I hope this simple example will make the issue much clearer to you. Yes, Mr. Boddu can mount all the investigation he wants. This however should be done with the active involvement of the police. It is therefore on that basis why I said that the Comptroller of Customs is wrong to think that this is just an investigation for him only, and also why the Commissioner of Police is equally (and more) wrong for saying that he is only interested in the shooting of the Customs Officer. I hope my position is a lot clearer to you now. Anyway, the exchange of views was quite healthy and entertaining.
Comments are closed.