3 Jul 2009

Weighing the evidence

Standardise weighing equipment in police stations? What comes to mind when you read that?

For me, it meant that somewhere, somehow, a sample of evidence was tampered with, and perhaps eaten by rats, and therefore was no longer the same weight as when it was initially weighed.

Now, I gleaned that merely from reading the words in the purple above. Just to see if I am right, I went on to read the article.

The court heard from police officers Roger Nicholas and Andy Tiwarie, that they arrested Ayers at his home at Lance McDougal Trace in Basseterre Village, Moruga, on December 11, 2002.

They told the court they searched a bedroom and a quantity of marijuana was found. The drug was taken to the Moruga Police Station, where it weighed six kilogrammes.

However, at the Forensic Science Centre on December 13, 2002- two days later-the plant material weighed 3.72 kilogrammes. No evidence was led to explain the difference in weight. [Not even that rats ate it!!]

The judge, Anthony Carmona, was either struck by the worst case of political correctness I’ve ever seen, or the worst case of dunceyness from the bench (we’ll leave Shermie out this time; he is in a league of his own).

The judge said this was something he had noticed in other courts as well and believes it may have to do with a lack of standardisation as it relates to equipment and lack of uniformity in their calibration.

Standardisation my arse.

We all know it was a duncey tief the sample to resell on the streets. Carmona should have said instead, “Please police dunceys, stop tiefing de samples; allyuh go make everybody allyuh arrest walk free, jest because allyuh too corrupt and greedy!”

And in case allyuh think I am being unduly harsh on the dunceys, please, just remember:- the evidence had been weighed… and found wanting.

Comments