Facing a mountain of criticism and public backlash over the decision to discontinue the private criminal charge that was filed by Police Constable Shawnette Bollers against Attorney Nirvan Singh, the Office of the Director of Prosection today sought to explain its decision.
Bollers had filed a charge under the Racial Hostility Act against Singh who is the son of retired Chancellor Carl Singh.
The Police Constable alleged that Singh made a number of racist remarks toward her while she was on duty at his father’s residence.
Today the DPP explained that a file from the Police was sent to the DPP’s office for advice on the 11th April and it was returned to the Police on the 24th April.
The DPP said under the Racial Hostility Act, “A person shall be guilty of an offence if he willfully excites or attempts to excite hostility or ill-will against any section of the public or against any person on the grounds of their or his race, By means of words spoken by him in a public place or spoken by him and transmitted for general reception by wireless telegraphy or telegraphs; or By causing words spoken by him or by some other person to be reproduced in a public place from a record; or (c) by means of written (including printed) matter or pictorial matter published by him.”
The DPP said the evidence is not consistent with the offence creating section of the Act as the words allegedly used by the suspect were not spoken in order to excite others to act with hostility or ill-will against the complainant.
The DPP also said that with respect to the allegation by the complainant of being spat on by the suspect, there is inconsistency regarding the allegation since based on the statement in the Police diary of the incident, Constable Bollers complained of the Attorney speaking in her face and “spitting up’ while doing so.
The DPP said based on the evidence recorded in the Police diary by the Constable, it is clear that the Attorney was “spitting up” while speaking and it was not a deliberate act of spitting.
The DPP’s Office offered no other details behind its decision to discontinue the private charge.
Woman Constable Bollers was joined by several other persons today in another protest outside the DPP’s Office.
The Constable said she believes the DPP’s decision has stripped her of her right to justice and for her case to be heard.
The Constable’s Attorney has already indicated that they intend to move to the High Court to challenge the DPP’s decision. Attorney Eusi Anderson said he is also prepared to take the matter all the way to the Caribbean Court of Justice.