Recently, the president of the Bar Association raised the issue of police interrogation of suspects and the controversy which arises when the “confession statement” is disputed by the accused, who declares in open court that the statement is not voluntary because there has been a violation of his rights.
As a frontline defender and lead counsel in many criminal cases, I have dealt with these allegations, but even for the most experienced and cunning of lawyers, it is almost impossible to establish that an accused’s rights have been violated in the absence of hard evidence to put before the court.
In my experienced judgment, the Royal Barbados Police Force has high standards of investigation, but in some cases, there are allegations that the “confession” statement was beaten out of the accused or that some threat or inducement was made, or that the statement was a downright fabrication by the police.
Sometimes, relentless cross-examination of the police officers may cause a collapse in the prosecution’s case, but the point being made by the president is that electronic recording of interrogation would protect both parties, but particularly the suspect, who stands to suffer most from any deviation from proper police procedures while he is “helping the police” with their enquiries.
It will obviously cost a “pretty penny” to retrofit the police stations with electronic facilities, but the legislation has been passed and not yet proclaimed, probably because the recording facilities are not yet in place.
Mention was made about “bad cops” but this is a wider issue, because police officers can be bad in other ways which do not touch on the matter of recording statements. This is a problem which affects all police forces everywhere, human nature being what it is.
But a critical issue arises. When allegations are made of deviant behaviour against police officers, someone must do the investigation, and inevitably, police officers by their specialized training are best suited to the task.
In larger societies where the police service is organized in separate regional forces, an experienced officer from say the Midlands Force may be brought in to investigate allegations against a member of the London Metropolitan Police.
In smaller societies, this is not possible, but I think the record shows that the integrity of the Royal Barbados Police Force is maintained by the rigour with which such investigations appear to be carried out, and by assigning an officer of a rank superior to that of the officer under investigation, to deal with the allegation. This may result in prosecution if the relevant evidence unfolds.
When I worked as a legal clerk in London in the early 1960s, allegations were rife that a much celebrated police officer who had worked in the Flying Squad was corrupt, and that he would plant evidence on suspects and give false evidence. Initially, the suspects were not believed but in 1964, the officer falsely accused a man of having a clay brick in his pocket while on a peaceful demonstration and charged him with having an offensive weapon.
The accused challenged the officer’s allegation and scientific evidence of his clothing confirmed that he could not have had the brick in his pocket or anywhere in his clothing. Vigorous comment by the Press triggered an internal investigation, a public enquiry, the arrest and indictment of the officer, his dismissal from the force and his confinement in a mental home for treatment.
As many as 16 innocent people were convicted and imprisoned, because of this officer’s behaviour.
Clearly, this was a special case, the officer was suffering from schizophrenia, but the major problem is how to identify such an errant officer. Usually, the key complaint comes from outside the organization.
In Barbados, we have a recently legislated Police Complaints Authority, independent of the police, to whom complaints of inappropriate conduct by police officers can be made. These complaints can be investigated and reports made, and sent to the Commissioner of Police and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
But the existence of this Authority, however effective, cannot solve the problem about which the president speaks.
That problem resides in the fact that confession statements made in the police stations ought to be electronically recorded as is done elsewhere.
This would eliminate the problem of confession statements remaining a matter of uneasy controversy in our courts during criminal trials.
