Recently, a cop armed himself with body cam and gun in a planned committing of a crime.
The body cam footage was promptly made public and all citizens of this country should be very concerned and keep on high alert regarding the possibilities of what law enforcement could inflict on the citizenry.
A police officer entering a citizen’s property without authorization and subsequently assaulting the citizen, is tantamount to a rabid dog doing the same.
This police officer seemed to be quite confident in placing himself smack in the middle of a trespass. He seemed not to be concerned about his actions being recorded and for this footage being viewed worldwide.
He demanded that the owner of the property hand over his son to him, while showing himself armed. This action in trying to nab the property owner’s kid is also known as an attempted kidnapping.
This is troubling and demands that the question be asked; is this the mind of law enforcement in Antigua and Barbuda? If it is, then we are in grave danger of losing out freedoms.
Some years ago, a similar matter caused the death of a citizen and great distress for the families and friends of both the victim and murderer. The killer cop was not known to be violent, but the absence of sound judgment in the matter led to him being convicted for the killing.
Police culture around the world has become very unhealthy for their employers. If cops have it in their minds that they are masters of their employers, and that there is none to dispute their ideology, then much tragedy lies ahead for the citizens.
It is no great effort for history to repeat itself and even become contagious to pandemic proportions. Law enforcement under Adolf Hitler had such an ideology and we are well aware of what transpired under that regime.
The presence of lawlessness in police actions around the world is being viewed with great alarm by potential victims, who are all of us, including individual police officers. The “Spirit of Lawlessness” does not discriminate, the aim is always destruction.
A cop convicted of a crime in the line of duty should be a sobering matter for all police officers especially those with families.
Law-abiding citizens should not be forced into defending themselves against law enforcement. It’s probably now fitting to reinstate the original title of “peace officers” to the police and dismiss the “law enforcement” title.
Police making their own laws and insisting that the citizens respect them will promote anarchy in the land. We want our police to be peacemakers, not instigators of mayhem.
It should be made mandatory that rouge cops be terminated from the force, and prosecuted if crimes were committed. A cop that kills a person and hides the body is beastly and predatory; that is what bears do. Why would a beast be allowed to carry a badge and a gun?
On 31st May, 2019 at about 1:00 am, a citizen received a call from the MSJ Medical Center to quickly come to the maternity ward; his wife was about to give birth. He promptly drove to the hospital and found the front entrance closed but was directed to the casualty area to gain access.
On entering the unit, he saw a woman that appeared to be a hospital worker and a young man in a police uniform, sitting on a bench conversing.
Thinking that the officer was an outpatient, the citizen asked the hospital worker for directions to reach the maternity floor. It was the officer however who responded to the citizen’s inquiry and told him that he would not be allowed access to the other floors.
The citizen realizing that the officer was not an outpatient but was on a security detail told him that he was called by the hospital because of his wife’s condition and that he had also paid for overnight accommodations to be with his wife.
The officer then offered to take what he thought was food, to the citizen’s wife but refused him entry to the maternity floor.
Flippantly, the citizen told the officer that he was not allowed to make policies for the hospital since he was only security. The officer became upset, however, at what he considered to be a downgrading of his status, as he protested being called a security guard.
However, the citizen did not refer to him as a “security guard” but that he was working security. The officer then stated emphatically that he was in charge of the hospital and no one but him had the power to let the citizen through.
The hospital worker recognizing the impass, then directed the citizen to the supervisor of the unit, from whom he received directions and instructions to get him to the maternity floor.
Upon reaching the maternity floor, the citizen was accosted by the same police officer. “I told you not to come up here, so you are under arrest”, said the officer. He then demanded the citizen’s ID and commanded him to stand up straight, he was also not to lean on anything in the area.
The citizen’s wife, followed by a nurse, came to the scene dragging her iv stand but nothing was going to hinder this rookie cop from getting his man.
The citizen was released from the said hospital two months prior to this incident and was still under the care of the outpatient unit for a life-threatening injury, thus he needed support to stand for even very short periods.
The officer was informed by the citizen that he would make much trouble for him the next day but before he could complete the statement the officer readied himself to physically engage the citizen. He halted however when he heard that the trouble would come “tomorrow”.
The officer seemed shaken about the threat of trouble coming for him the next day and called his supervisor; this request, to call his supervisor, was made of the officer several times during the confrontation.
He told the sergeant that it appeared as if the citizen was a “big man with high-up connections” and that he could lose his job if he was reported by this “big man”.
The supervisor asked for the citizen’s cellphone number and call him with an apology for the officer’s behavior. ” This is not our policy”, he told the citizen.
This officer seemed to be one fresh out of the gate and soon appeared to be a thoroughbred rouge cop. Allow him ten to fifteen years, precluding a change in attitude, and he will graduate to “terrorist cop”, adept at criminal actions and skilled in “the cover-up”.
It is to be noted that the security officer did not become concerned about his behavior until he thought that the citizen he had committed a trespass against was a “big man with high-up connections”.
The recent matter of the police corporal that trespassed on a citizen’s property, and subsequently kidnapped him, would not have been a thought if that citizen was a “big man”, still sitting in the house of representatives. This fact makes the officer’s actions beastly and predatory.
Circling the wagons around offending officers is endemic in police culture. Investigations of police crimes are drawn-out while investigations in regard to citizens of “low degree” are placed on the express rails.
Criminal police officers are of a higher social status than the citizenry, thus they are treated differently.
Can the citizenry be comfortable with this arrangement?