Former Police Commissioner Pompey Criticises Court Reporting, Clarifies Legal Outcome
Former police commissioner Rawlston Pompey has sharply criticised what he described as inaccurate reporting of a recent court matter, arguing that the outcome has been misrepresented as a finding of “not guilty.”
In a strongly worded statement, Pompey rejected the characterization of the case, calling it a “kangaroo news story” and questioning the reporting surrounding the proceedings.
“The court never declared anyone ‘not guilty,’” Pompey said, insisting that the defendants were instead “discharged from the court’s jurisdiction.”
He supported the legal position outlined by attorney Charlesworth Tabor, stating that there was no criminal trial conducted.
According to Pompey, the prosecution did not present evidence in chief, and there was no opportunity for cross-examination or re-examination of witnesses. He further argued that the absence of these key procedural steps meant the matter could not properly be considered a concluded trial.
Pompey outlined what he described as a series of prosecutorial failures, including the lack of witness summonses to compel attendance. He said this left the prosecution unable to seek bench warrants when witnesses failed to appear.
He added that the complaint, which he said was filed in the name of Police Commissioner Atlee Rodney, was ultimately dismissed by the court.
The former commissioner suggested the court appeared dissatisfied with the handling of the case, describing the prosecution as being in a “time-wasting mode.”
Pompey also praised Magistrate Andrew M. Mighty for the decision, saying it exposed “prosecutorial weaknesses, mediocrity and inefficiency.”
The comments come amid public discussion over the interpretation of the court’s ruling and the conduct of the case.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
As I was in court perhaps I should speak. The defendants were all on the stand and after a short stand down by the court for 10 minutes, the prosecution Senior Sergeant Taylor said he was ready to proceed, and called several witnesses names. It turns out that the several witnesses whose names were called, did not answer to their names. It was then that the prosecution indicated that the witnesses were not present, and then magistrate declared that the matter is dismissed for want of prosecution and the defendants declared not guilty by the court. The distinction sought to be made by whoever is too minute an issue. Had I consider it being any legal issue worthy of discourse, as per my training, I would have stand and ensure the court did not fall into error. We making a mountain out of a haystack
Pompy, explain to me a man that is not steeped in the law, how is it that they got permission from the police for the beach o cade, was escorted by the police and yet was charged by the same police for trespassing on the beach.
Also explain how one can be charged for trespassing on a beach in antigua, when the law gives citizens the right to be on the beach.
The judge should have issued bench warrants for those witnesses to answer for wasting the court’s time.
@Cool Ruler they were not charged for trespassing on a beach. Access to all beaches in Antigua and Barbuda is protected by law. They were charged for trespassing on private land. An access to Larys Bay was prepared so there was access other than the traditional access which was no longer in use because it was private property. Getting permission from the police for a beach o cade does not mean you can just enter private property. The law is the law and should be observed and respected. A disagreement about any law should be challenged in court and not challenged by breaking the law. The police was there to protect the people on the beach o cade and not there to watch them break the law. The police was also negligent in their duty and should have been disciplined. Two wrongs do not make right.
It’s you friend running his mouth again at every opportunity.
What turns on that Mr Pompey that you have to make sure that you come out and make it look like they only get away because the people didn’t come.
Where is your law degree? You are not going to interfere in this victory. You did enough damage to UPP in 2004.
Is not always you have to push your mouth into legal matters.
WHAT THE HELL…! @COOL RULER: …BEACH-O-CADE? …MANY GOT IT WRONG:
NO CHARGE FOR ‘…BEACH TRESPASSING: BUT ‘…TRESPASSING ON LAND
***
WELL, COOL RULER
Not sure what the hell is a ‘…BEACH-O-CADE.’
Only ‘former Commissioner of Police, ATLEE RODNEY KPM,’ has the explanation to the question.
***
Can say to you that: when
(i) ‘…A COMMISSIONER OF POLICE: issued
(ii) …PERMISSION TO ANY CITIZEN: to
(iii) …HOLD AN ACTIVITY, SUCH AS DESCRIBED: in
(iv) …IN ANY PUBLIC PLACE: for
(v) …A LIMITED PERIOD OF TIME: among
(iv) …THE CRITICALLY-CONSIDERED FACTORS: are
(a) …PUBLIC SAFETY: and
(c) …PUBLIC ORDER.’
***
When, from ‘…INTELLIGENCE:’ these
(i) ‘…WERE NOT THREATENED: or
(ii) …LIKENED TO BE OCCASSIONED: then
(i) ‘…THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, SHALL ENSURE: that
(ii) …THE ACTIVITY IS ADEQUATELY POLICED.’
***
WHY…?
(a) ‘…TO PROTECT PARTICILANTS
(b) …TO MAINTAIN LAW AND ORDER: among
(c) …ORGANIZERS/PARTICIPANTS: and
(d) …GENERAL PUBLIC.’
***
NO ONE, INCLUDING POLICE OFFICERS, SHALL BE SEEN: as
(i) ‘…BEING ABOVE LAW: or
(ii) …OPERATING OUTSIDE THE REALM OF LAW.’
***
TRESPASS ON LAND: SMALL CHARGES ACT: CHAPTER 405: SECTION 51
The ‘…Small Charges Act,’ provides for ‘…FIVE OFFENCES: from
(a) ‘…UNLAWFULLY ENTERS LAND/PREMISES IN INSULTING: ANNOYING MANNER…:
(b) …UNLAWFULLY ENTERS , HAVING BEEN FORBIDDEN:
(c) ,,,UNLAWFULLY ENTERS AND REMAINS, HAVING BEEN REQUIRED TO DEPART:
(d)…UNLAWFULLY ENTERS AND MISCONDUCTS HIM/HERSELF: or
(e) …LAWFULLY ENTERS AND PERSISTENTLY REMAINS AFTER REQUIRED TO DEPART.’
***
GOT TO BE ONE OF THESE OFFENCES.
***
NOT A DARN THING ABOUT ‘…BEACH AND ACCESS’ IN THIS LAW.’
***
WHAT THE HELL…!
RULER, KNOW YOU ARE NOT AN IDIOT: …BEEN THERE: …DONE THAT.
***
READ AND LEARN MORE.
***
WALK GOOD
***
WHAT THE HELL…! @GO REST YOURSELF POMPEY: …WHERE IS LAW DEGREE?
WHAT ‘…JACKASS QUESTION…?’
***
The ‘…Mighty Sparrow,’ sings about: a
(i) ‘…A BIG BELLY BAJAN MAN: who
(ii) …COME TO TRINIDAD: and
(iii) ‘…PLAYING CALYPSONIAN.’
***
HE WAS SINGING ALL KINDS OF ‘…NANCY STORIES.’
HE SINGS:
“…DONKEY RAISE YOUR TAIL AND ‘…BLOW YOUR HORN.’
***
SOME COMMENTERS OFTEN DO THAT- ‘…BLOW HORNS.’
***
RAWLSTON POMPEY: has
(a) ‘…NO LAW DEGREE: needs
(b) …NO LAW DEGREE: and
(c) …NOT AFRAID OF ANY ‘…LAW DEGREED PRACTITIONERS: when
(d) …IT COMES TO CRIMINAL LAW.’
***
WHY…?
(i) ‘…HAD BEEN A ‘…LAW ENFORCER’ FOR OVER 3-DECADES:
(ii) …HELD POSITION AS ‘…HEAD OF POLICE PROSECUTIONS.’
(iii) …PROSECUTED SUMMARY CASES: at
(iv) …THE MAGISTERIAL LEVEL:
(v) …REPRESENTED OFFICE OF DPP AT ‘…COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: at
(vi) …THEN PRELIMINARY INQUIRIES: and
(vii) …SUBSEQUENTLY ‘…PAPER COMMITTALS:
(viii) …HELD POSITION AS ‘..HEAD OF THE CID.
***
Thus, two things ‘…RAWLSTON POMPEY’ KNOWS: are
(a) ‘…CRIMINAL LAW: and
(b) …ENFORCEMENT OF LAW.’
***
So, likened: to
(i) ‘…THE JACKASS: AH AH…! the
(ii) ‘…THE DONKEY:
(iii) …RAISE YOUR TAIL: and
(iv) …BLOW YOUR DARN HORN.’
***
THERE IS MUCH TO LEARN RIGHT HERE AT ‘…ANR’ FROM ‘…RAWLSTON POMPEY.’
***
NO ‘…LAW DEGREE IS NEEDED.’ …START LEARNING NOW.
***
WHAT THE HELL…!
***
WALK GOOD.
***
WHAT THE HELL…! @GO REST YOURSELF POMPEY: …WHERE IS LAW DEGREE?
WHAT A QUESTION…?’
***
The ‘…Mighty Sparrow,’ sings about: a
(i) ‘…A BIG BELLY BAJAN MAN: who
(ii) …COME TO TRINIDAD: and
(iii) ‘…PLAYING CALYPSONIAN.’
***
HE WAS SINGING ALL KINDS OF ‘…NANCY STORIES.’
HE SINGS:
“…DONKEY RAISE YOUR TAIL AND ‘…BLOW YOUR HORN.’
***
SOME COMMENTERS OFTEN DO THAT- ‘…BLOW HORNS.’
***
RAWLSTON POMPEY: has
(a) ‘…NO LAW DEGREE: needs
(b) …NO LAW DEGREE: and
(c) …NOT AFRAID OF ANY ‘…LAW DEGREED PRACTITIONERS: when
(d) …IT COMES TO CRIMINAL LAW.’
***
WHY…?
(i) ‘…HAD BEEN A ‘…LAW ENFORCER’ FOR OVER 3-DECADES:
(ii) …HELD POSITION AS ‘…HEAD OF POLICE PROSECUTIONS.’
(iii) …PROSECUTED SUMMARY CASES: at
(iv) …THE MAGISTERIAL LEVEL:
(v) …REPRESENTED OFFICE OF DPP AT ‘…COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: at
(vi) …THEN PRELIMINARY INQUIRIES: and
(vii) …SUBSEQUENTLY ‘…PAPER COMMITTALS:
(viii) …HELD POSITION AS ‘..HEAD OF THE CID.
***
Thus, two things ‘…RAWLSTON POMPEY’ KNOWS: are
(a) ‘…CRIMINAL LAW: and
(b) …ENFORCEMENT OF LAW.’
***
So, likened: to
(i) ‘…THE JACKASS: AH AH…! the
(ii) ‘…THE DONKEY:
(iii) …RAISE YOUR TAIL: and
(iv) …BLOW YOUR DARN HORN.’
***
THERE IS MUCH TO LEARN RIGHT HERE AT ‘…ANR’ FROM ‘…RAWLSTON POMPEY.’
***
NO ‘…LAW DEGREE IS NEEDED.’ …START LEARNING NOW.
***
WHAT THE HELL…!
***
WALK GOOD.
***
WHAT DARN DIFFERENCE DID IT MAKE.IF THEY WERE NOT FOUND GUILTY.THE CASE IS OVER,DONE WITH.THEY WALKED OUT OF THE COURT WITH THEIR GOOD NAMES AND INTEGRITY IN TACT.THE CHARGES WERE MOST RIDICULOUS TO BEGIN WITH.THE BEACHES IN ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA ARE ALL PUBLIC.THERE MUST BE PUBLIC ENTRANCES AVAILABLE TO ENTER ALL OF THOSE BEACHES.THE PEOPLE OF THE NATION SHOULD USED THIS CASE AS A LANDMARK FOR FUTURE BEACH ISSUES LIKE THIS. ACTIONS SPEAKS LOUDER THAN WORDS.
Comments are closed.