|
According to Francis he did not see any other uniformed police when he and the police party arrived on the scene and he was careful to add that he was not in charge of the party, but that Mr. Christopher was the officer in charge. He did not see any armed police on the street when he was assisting Mr. Hughes and all the gun fire had already ceased when he first arrived at the Carenage.
After escorting Mr. Hughes he returned to Otway House where he saw Mr. Rupert Bishop lying on the floor upstairs. He appeared to be injured because his shirt was wet with blood. Francis called the policemen who were downstairs and "instructed them to life him carefully and put him in the police transport and take him to hospital." Eric [sic] Bishop was placed in a police landrover which was in front of Otway House.
Francis admitted that on that day Police Constable Randolph Mayers, Charles and Angus and another constable known as Darkie [Lennard Charles] were all stationed at Mount Royal i.e. at the Sans Souci Police sub-station located near the entrance of Mount Royal.
He admitted also that after the incident on January 21, 1974, he saw looting taking place in St. George's at Everybody's Store, James Milne's premises, Granby's Store, Charles of Grenada. He said the looting continued for days.
158. In the ultimate assessment of the evidence of Francis Adonis it might be relevant to consider the following:-
| Q. |
On the 21st that Monday you heard shots? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. |
| Q. |
That's why you went down? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. |
| Q. |
And - a party - I thought you said Inspector Raymond, Asst. Supt. Christopher and six policemen in one transport went together? |
| A. |
Well, we actually had two transports; . . . but Mr. Christopher and Mr. Raymond, they were in the same transport. |
| Q. |
You said Mr. Christopher was in charge? |
| A. |
He was in charge, sir. |
| Q. |
Just you hearing shots decided to go down and see what you could do? |
| A. |
Well, my branch is the C.I.D. sir, and a party was formed downstairs and Inspector Raymond and I went on our own to see what was actually taking place. |
| Q. |
Who ordered the party to be formed? |
| A. |
The Commissioner, sir. |
|
. . . . . . . . . .
| Q. |
Did you hear rifle fire on the 21st of January? |
| A. |
It sounded like that of rifle, sir. |
| Q. |
Did you make any enquiry as to whether Police rifles had been used on the 21st of January? |
| A. |
No, sir. |
| Q. |
And I assume that up to today, May 2, you made no such enquiry? Is that right? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. |
|
. . . . . . . . . .
| Q. |
Inspector Raymond, Mr. Christopher and about six men? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. |
| Q. |
Were they issued ammunition so far as you know? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. They had ammunition. |
| Q. |
Is it not the case that when firearms and ammunition are issued to a constable a note is made of it? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. It should have been made. |
| Q. |
Did you check to find out what return was made of the ammunition brought back by the men to whom it was issued? |
| A. |
No, Sir. |
| Q. |
If you has to check that record you may have discovered that the men to whom the ammunition was issued had used some. Is that right? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. |
| Q. |
Don't you think that would be an important aspect of the enquiry as to what took place that day? |
| A. |
I think it is an important aspect, sir. |
| Q. |
Why then, you, head of the Criminal Investigation Department, until 13th May (1974) have not yet ascertained how much ammunition was issued and how much was returned? Could you explain that? |
| A. |
No, sir. |
| Q. |
As head of the Criminal Investigation Dept. do you not consider that there are matters which ought to have been enquired into - where there is a loss of a life and other people injured and so on? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. |
| Q. |
Why have you been so inert? |
| A. |
Sir, as I said previously, all my directions came from the Committee. |
|
. . . . . . . . . .
| Q. |
Did you form an assessment as to whether the use of rifle fire was justified on that day? |
| A. |
According to what I saw when I got on the Carenage Sir, I thought it was not justified if rifles were fired. |
| Q. |
Now if you think in your assessment that the rifle fire was not justified why did you not enquire into the circumstances which caused it to be used? |
| A. |
I was waiting on the Committee. |
|
159. One of the matters about which Adonis Francis testified was a report lodged at the Criminal Investigation Department by Mr. Alfred Fakhre, the owner of the Amado Store, who complained that members from a demonstration entered his store and forced him to close the doors. Fakhre said he had been threatened and Francis instructed him to seek police protection whenever there was a demonstration. Consequently,
Fakhre sought and obtained police protection whenever there was a demonstration. The Amado Store is obliquely opposite to the Granby's Store. Both stores sell men's suitings, ladies material, children clothing, etc.
Evidently on January 21, 1974, the Amado Store was opened and Granby's Store was closed. The Amado Store was not among those looted but Granby's Store was.
Francis admitted that he learned that some of the police aides participated in the looting.
| Q. |
You said that looting went on that day and on days following. |
| A. |
Yes, sir. |
| Q. |
Was this an operation that your police force could not prevent? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. I think it could have been prevented. |
| Q. |
Could you help now by letting us know why it wasn't prevented? |
| A. |
I think that the men who went on duty were afraid of the people who were doing the looting. |
| Q. |
Were those policemen armed? |
| A. |
Yes, sir. On some occasions they are armed. |
| Q. |
Is looting a highly criminal offence? |
| A. |
It is a criminal offence. |
Back: Duffus 156 Next: Duffus 160 Duffus ContentsHome Page: Index
CONTACT
| | | | |