Monday, September 19, 2011

Letter: DPP attempt to ban media from showing crimes is backward step

I must say that I am totally disappointed at the backward approach that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has taken regarding issuing of instructions to media houses not to show those videos on national television and on other sites etc. 

The video footage of the men on Nelson Street committing crimes in broad daylight is something that I feel should be highlighted in all forms of media.

After all when compared to video footage that was shown in the recent UK riots, this should be encouraged. The UK police searched through thousands of hours of CCTV footage to be able to identify and charge persons. 

In doing some brief research, video evidence played an important role in the investigation of the murder of two-year-old James Bulger in Liverpool, England as far back as in 1993. A surveillance camera in a shopping mall clearly showed the child being separated from his mother and then being led to his death by the two boys who were later convicted of the killing. The tape was repeatedly shown on television and has helped fix this especially tragic case in the memory of the British public. 

In another case, video footage from cameras in a West London shopping mall was intensively studied by police to solve a shooting in 1999. Another famous piece of video evidence is the recording of Diana, Princess of Wales, leaving a hotel in Paris just minutes before the car accident that was to end her life in 1997.

In this modern day we should be using the available technologies to catch the criminals. It looks as if the victims have no rights in this place, only the criminals. Do you know how that makes the victims feel that the persons who violated them or killed their family member, get away free and want to now turn around and sue the state for millions. Is that fair? That can’t be fair and just at all.

I remember long ago that wanted persons’ pictures would be on boards at police stations showing the faces of wanted persons. What is so wrong with showing their faces if they have good reason to believe that they have been involved in illegal activities? 

There are persons who use their cameras to video other persons committing illegal acts. What about show hosts such as Inshan Ishmael and Ian Alleyne who show illegal acts on national television? 

So if I have a CCTV camera in my business place and some guys hold me up in it, rob my place, I can’t take that to the media and show it? That is ridiculous. Their faces should be pasted over all television stations. 

What about the famous “U Report” in which persons highlight people’s car numbers who break the traffic laws or when there are numerous videos posted online about school children being beaten up? Why didn’t the DPP come out and say these things should not be done then? How come it is so convenient for him to now state that the media should not run these videos?

While I understand that there may be exceptional cases where someone’s identity may be in doubt, we must use every available opportunity to prosecute to the fullest extent possible those who can be identified clearly using the video footage and I daresay that some of those persons from Nelson Street closely resembles those persons on the video footage!

In the newspapers it was noted that the DPP referred to the case of Boodram v AG of Trinidad and Tobago (1996) 47 WIR 459 in relation to pre-trial publicity. Why hasn’t that stopped the British and European police from using what is a great crime fighting tool?

If the DPP doesn’t get his act together, Trinidad & Tobago will fall at the hands of the criminals and the DPP in particular will have to carry that on his conscience. Get with the times DPP.

Anne-Marie Redman | Thavenot Street, Tacarigua.

No comments:

Jai & Sero

Jai & Sero

Our family at home in Toronto 2008

Our family at home in Toronto 2008
Amit, Heather, Fuzz, Aj, Jiv, Shiva, Rampa, Sero, Jai