A 12-year-old girl who was held for several hours at St. John’s Police Station after a welfare check is back home, following an incident in which she allegedly bit a female officer during attempts to restrain her, according to information reviewed Wednesday.
Police visited the child’s residence after her mother reported her missing late Monday; the girl returned home shortly after midnight Wednesday, before officers arrived for the welfare check.
During the encounter, the child allegedly became aggressive and was taken into custody and placed in a cell until late afternoon, raising questions about whether procedures under the Child Justice Act were followed.
A source familiar with child-protection law said the case sits near the line between compliance and breach, noting the Act requires assessment by a social worker through the Youth Intervention Unit before a child is brought before the Child Justice Board.
There was no immediate indication those steps occurred
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
12???? wow!
What about the young man stabbed with scissors last week. Why wasn’t the minor responsible for that locked up.
So the child, aged 12, is reported missing on Monday and the police do not show up until AFTER the child returns after Wednesday midnight, so maybe Thursday morning? Something does not sound right about this timeline.
Knowing what has been happening surrounding ‘missing children’, was there even a welfare officer with them on this visit?
Has this child revealed her whereabouts for over 48 hours?
It would seem that this child’s behaviour is out of control. To have to be restrained during a welfare check makes it seem that she acted belligerently. Then to bite the hand of the Officer, who, I am assuming, had to apply some measure of force is, at the very least, a misdemeanor.
Are some facts missing from this story?
WHAT THE HELL…! …OH LAWD: …12-YEAR-OLD BIT FINGER OF FEMALE POLICE OFFICER?
***
ANR:
‘…PLEASE DO NOT FOLLOW TTHE ‘…FAMILIARITY JACK DONKEY’ [Paragraph 4].
***
CHILD JUSTICE ACT:
‘…Unless there are compelling reasons justifying an arrest, a ‘JUVENILE’ (Omitted from the Legal Interpretation) ‘SHALL’ be arrested fo an offence stated in ‘…SCHEDULE 1.’
***
SCHEDULE 1
(a) ‘…For a ‘NON-GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM ASSAULT:
***
In this case – Allegedly ‘…BITTEN FEMALE POLICE OFFICER’S FINGER- A ‘…COMPELLING REASON FOR ARREST.’
***
HUMOR:
Must have tasted like ‘…KENTUCKY- ‘…FINGER-TASTING,’ AND DARN ‘…LICKING GOOD.’
***
SERIOUS:
THE CHILD JUSTICE ACT –
[Section 12 (i): No. 23 of 2015].
***
THE MOST DANGEROUS CHILD PROTECTION AND PUBLIC DISSATISFIED ACT
***
Interprets ‘CHILD’ as ‘…MEANS A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF 18-YEARS: [Section 2]:
***
MISCHIEF AIM BY PARLIAMENT:
***
It states:
‘…An Act to establish:
(a) ‘…ACRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS:
(b) …FOR CHILDREN ACCUSED OF COMMITTED OFFENCES: based on
(i) …RESTORATIVE JUSTICE: and
(ii) …WHICH AIMS AT PROTECTING THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN:
(ii) …PROVIDING FOR THE CRIMINAL CAPACITY OF SUCH CHILDREN:
(iii) …TO INSTITUTE DIVERSION OF CASES AWAY FROM FORMAL COURT PROCEDURES:
(iv) …MAKE ASSESSMENT OF CHILDREN:
(v) …MAKE INITIAL INQUIRY AS COMPULSORY PROCEDURES: for’
(a) …DETERMINE AVAILABLE SENTENCING OPTIONS:
(b) …TO CONSOLIDATE THE LAW ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN:
(c) …FOR CONNECTED PURPOSES’ [Child Justice Act: NO.23 of 2025].
***
THOSE CHARGED WITH RESPONSIBILITY:
(i) ‘…A MAGISTRATE:
(ii) …A MEMBER OF THE CLERGY (Counselling/Child Psychology): and
(iii) …TWO SOCIAL WORKERS:’
[CJA: Section 6 (2)].
***
QUORUM FOR MEETING AND DECISIONS ON RIGHTS OF CHILDREN
***
SHEER STUPIDITY:
FOUR BOARD MEMBERS: …QUORUM- TWO BOARD MEMBERS.
(a) ‘…TWO MAY BE PRESENT: and
(b) ‘…TWO MAY BE ABSENT.’
***
FOR EXPEDIENCY, BUT ASSININITY: of
(i) ‘…LEGAL DRAFTERS: and
(ii) …BRIGHT LEGISLATORS.’
***
LEGAL PROVISION:
‘…A Quorum of the Board is constituted: by
(a) ‘…THE MAGISTRATE: and
(b) …ONE OTHER MEMBER OF THE BOARD:
***
MOCKERY OF LAW:
(c) ‘…NO ORDER MADE BY THE BOARD (Even ridiculously, by only two members), SHALL BE INVALID BY REASON ONLY OF THE ABSENCE OF ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD’ [CJA: Section 7 (2)].
***
CLEARLY MAKING ‘…MOCKERY OF LAW.’
***
QUESTIONS:
(i) ‘…HOW DO THESE HELP THE WAYWARD: RUNAWAY: TROUBLE-MAKING CHILD?
(ii) …HOW DO THESE PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF A CHILD?
(iii) …HOW DO THESE HELP SOCIETY?
***
Finally, even though a darn ‘…FINGER’ looks like ‘…CHICKEN,’ don’t taste it, just to know if its ‘…FINGER LICKING.’
***
Be mindful where you put that darn ‘…FINGER,’ of yours, especially, the ‘…INDEX: …MIDDLE: …RING FINGER.’
***
OFFICERS, MALE AND FEMALE, BE CAREFUL, GET ‘…FINGER LIGHTS.’
***
WHAT THE HELL…!
***
So if a parent hears that another child is getting physical with their child at school, that parent would sometimes want to go to the school and “knack back people pickney”. Now same child see an officer in “uniform” and decides to hell with any respect and gets to spend some quality time in a station and y’all in uproar? Give me a break. Some of them need to spend some time there to scare them straight.
Comments are closed.