INDECOM Sends Report to Parliament Regarding DPP Decision in Robert - Kentucky Kid - Hill Matter2
3
_______________________________ ________________________ Contact: Kahmile A. Reid - Senior Public Relations Officer The Independent Commission of Investigations Office: 1.876.968.8875 Ext. 282. Mobile: 1.876.833.7488. Fax: 1.876.960.4767. Email: [email protected] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE TELEPHONE: 968-8875 THE INDEPENDENT COM MISSION OF INVEST IGATION S 1 A Dumfries Road Kingston 10 Jamaica INDECOM SUBMITS SPECIAL REPORT TO PARLIAMENT CONCERNING ROBERT “KENTUCKY KID” HILL October 30, 2014 - The Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM) wishes to advise the public that it has sent a special report to parliament regarding the case of the fatal shooting of Robert “Kentucky Kid” Hill by agents of the state as i t is the Commission’ s view that there are issues therefrom that require the special attention of Parliament. The Commission has concluded that there is a strong prima facie case that Hill’s right to life was breached because the evidence reveals that his life was taken by unjustified use of force by agents of the state. In addition there was no effective prosecution . This vie w is supported by evid ence that t he o fficers’ accounts of th e inci dent and possible inferential evidence that the killing was motivated by a private grouse. Further, scientific evidence does not support that allegation that Hill fired upon the police officers. In this special report, the Commission indicat ed its concern about the manner in which the matter was brought to an end which was essentially as a result of the DPP’s view that it was not possible for self defence (the claim of the police officers) to be negatived. Concerns of the Commission Regarding The DPP’s Decision 1. The D PP mad e two decisions, the first of which was t o end the prose cution; secondly, to end it by way of a formal verdict. As the Constitution provides that the DPP has the power to institute, undertake, take over or terminate proceedings, it was open to the DPP to end the prosecution by her own act. This, the Comm ission believ es, could have been achieve d by entering a nolle prosequi which would not bar renewed proceedings. Howev er the matter was terminated by way of a directed verdict and in doing so an acquittal was handed down baring any future proceedings. The former defendants will enjoy a bar to future proceedings without adjudication on evidence. The procedure adopted prevents any reversal of the DPP’s decision, rendering accountability of that Office illusory. Further INDECOM had no prior indication that the DPP was minded to take this direction, as there was no consultation with the Commis sion of Hill’s family. 2. The DPP’s claim that it was not possible for self defence (the claim of the police officers) to be negatived and that the only witness as to fact would have been the defendant’s. The Commission is of the view that eyewitness evidence is not superior to other evidence. It is open to a jury to reject this evidence by relying on circumstantial evidence and direct evidence. 3. The DPP claimed that the scientific evidence supported the police officers’ version, which is plainly not so based on the findings at the end of scientific analysis. 4. The DPP urged that the inquest di d not reveal any new material to support th e case o f murder. This is not so as the full text of one police officer’ s report was not provided until the inquest, one of the
-
Upload
yolande-gyles-levy -
Category
Documents
-
view
221 -
download
0
Transcript of INDECOM Sends Report to Parliament Regarding DPP Decision in Robert - Kentucky Kid - Hill Matter2
8/10/2019 INDECOM Sends Report to Parliament Regarding DPP Decision in Robert - Kentucky Kid - Hill Matter2
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/indecom-sends-report-to-parliament-regarding-dpp-decision-in-robert-kentucky 1/3
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Contact: Kahmile A. Reid - Senior Public Relations Officer
The Independent Commission of Investigations
Office: 1.876.968.8875 Ext. 282. Mobile: 1.876.833.7488. Fax: 1.876.960.4767. Email: [email protected]
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TELEPHONE: 968-8875 THE INDEPENDENT COMMISSION OF INVESTIGATIONS
1 A Dumfries Road
Kingston 10
Jamaica
INDECOM SUBMITS SPECIAL REPORT TO PARLIAMENT
CONCERNING ROBERT “KENTUCKY KID” HILL
October 30, 2014 - The Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM) wishes to advise the publicthat it has sent a special report to parliament regarding the case of the fatal shooting of Robert “Kentucky Kid”
Hill by agents of the state as it is the Commission’s view that there are issues therefrom that require the specialattention of Parliament.
The Commission has concluded that there is a strong prima facie case that Hill’s right to life was breachedbecause the evidence reveals that his life was taken by unjustified use of force by agents of the state. In additionthere was no effective prosecution. This view is supported by evidence that the officers’ accounts of the incidentand possible inferential evidence that the killing was motivated by a private grouse. Further, scientific evidencedoes not support that allegation that Hill fired upon the police officers.
In this special report, the Commission indicated its concern about the manner in which the matter was broughtto an end which was essentially as a result of the DPP’s view that it was not possible for self defence (the claimof the police officers) to be negatived.
Concerns of the Commission Regarding The DPP’s Decision
1.
The DPP made two decisions, the first of which was to end the prosecution; secondly, to end it by wayof a formal verdict. As the Constitution provides that the DPP has the power to institute, undertake,take over or terminate proceedings, it was open to the DPP to end the prosecution by her own act.
This, the Commission believes, could have been achieved by entering a nolle prosequi which would notbar renewed proceedings. However the matter was terminated by way of a directed verdict and in doingso an acquittal was handed down baring any future proceedings. The former defendants will enjoy abar to future proceedings without adjudication on evidence. The procedure adopted prevents anyreversal of the DPP’s decision, rendering accountability of that Office illusory. Further INDECOMhad no prior indication that the DPP was minded to take this direction, as there was no consultation with the Commission of Hill’s family.
2. The DPP’s claim that it was not possible for self defence (the claim of the police officers) to be
negatived and that the only witness as to fact would have been the defendant’s. The Commission is ofthe view that eyewitness evidence is not superior to other evidence. It is open to a jury to reject thisevidence by relying on circumstantial evidence and direct evidence.
3. The DPP claimed that the scientific evidence supported the police officers’ version, which is plainlynot so based on the findings at the end of scientific analysis.
4. The DPP urged that the inquest did not reveal any new material to support the case of murder. This isnot so as the full text of one police officer’s report was not provided until the inquest, one of the
8/10/2019 INDECOM Sends Report to Parliament Regarding DPP Decision in Robert - Kentucky Kid - Hill Matter2
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/indecom-sends-report-to-parliament-regarding-dpp-decision-in-robert-kentucky 2/3
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Contact: Kahmile A. Reid - Senior Public Relations Officer
The Independent Commission of Investigations
Office: 1.876.968.8875 Ext. 282. Mobile: 1.876.833.7488. Fax: 1.876.960.4767. Email: [email protected]
defendant’s threat to the deceased, and unreliability of another civilian were all revealed at the inquest. This new material added to the circumstances that suggest the killing was premeditated and not in selfdefence.
5. The DPP asserts that there was no material arising above suspicion of a conspiracy to murder. TheDPP did not give due consideration to the impact of the evidence of motive which would negate theself defence claim and explain why the shooting took place.
The Commission further made recommendations regarding the need for reform of the Coroner’s system in Jamaica. For the Coroner’s System, the Commission recommended that it be deemed an interested party forthe purpose of its mandate. The Commission was forced to apply to the Coroner to become an interested party.
In the case a witness refused to give evidence. It appears too easy for persons not to give evidence after beingsummoned. This defeats the inquisitorial nature of the proceedings. The Commission thereby recommendshigher penalties on persons who refuse to give evidence without lawful justification or excuse.
There are difficulties being experienced in the jury system generally and the Coroner’s Court is by no meansexempt. Hence the Commission recommends that the Act be revised to abolish the need for a jury at theinquest and for the issues to be ventilated and decided upon by the Coroner or Special Coroner. It is not theintention of the Commission to discount the importance of jurors, but seek to bring greater efficiency to the
proceedings. The Commission also recommended that additional Special Coroners be appointed as the current workload cannot be left to a single Coroner.
He also reiterated the need for observation of the private right to bring and conduct a prosecution is not fullyobserved in practice and is somewhat ambiguous in statute.
Among the recommendations made in this Report to Parliament, are that the police officers be subject tointernal disciplinary hearings concerning their use of force; false statements by one of the concerned officers;failure to involve other police officers in the operation in contravention of direct orders from superiors. It wasalso recommended that the Solicitor General consider compensating the estate of Robert Hill for the breachof his right to life.
Background
On the 8th of December 2009, Hill was killed in his community of Ivy Green by a party of three policeofficers: Constables Uriel Anderson and Gary Thomas and Special Constable Norval Warren, all of
whom claimed to have shot him in self defence.
An investigation conducted by the Bureau of Special Investigation (BSI) and the now defunct PolicePublic Complaints Authority (PPCA) assessed the file and concluded that the shooting did not occurunder the circumstances described by the officers and was a result of a conspiracy. The file wassubsequently submitted to the DPP.
On June 9, 2010, the DPP recommended that the matter be referred to the Coroner.
On July 24, 2014, the jury in the Coroner’s Court directed that the police officers and two civilians becharged with murder.
On September 23, 2014, three police officers and two civilian were charged with the murder of Robert“Kentucky Kid” Hill.
On October 14, 2014, the DPP offered no evidence after the jury was empanelled and the defendants were acquitted.
-33-
8/10/2019 INDECOM Sends Report to Parliament Regarding DPP Decision in Robert - Kentucky Kid - Hill Matter2
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/indecom-sends-report-to-parliament-regarding-dpp-decision-in-robert-kentucky 3/3
