INDECOM’s Demagogic Tactics Came Straight From JFJ’s Playbook.……

INDECOM’s dem­a­gog­ic tac­tics came straight from JFJ’s play­book….…

In a sim­ple word­ed well-rea­soned Article appear­ing in Sundays, Gleaner Dr.Garth Rattary evis­cer­at­ed the argu­ments of Terrence Willaims regard­ing Police fatal shootings.

The bril­liant sum­ma­tion of Dr.Rattary a sup­port­er of the INDECOM act and of the Police argued : If an offi­cer of the law feels threat­ened by any­one, even an unarmed indi­vid­ual, he or she will be with­in his or her rights to use dead­ly force because the aggres­sor may over­pow­er him or her and use the acquired dead­ly weapon to kill, as hap­pened on April 28, 2017, when a sus­pect wrest­ed the ser­vice pis­tol away from a police­man and killed him with it.
We need INDECOM to help pro­tect us and improve the police force. They can’t achieve their goal when they so often appear adver­sar­i­al towards the police.

Dr. Rattary went on to reveal. Many police tell me that they have noth­ing against INDECOM, but they have prob­lems with the man­ner­ism of the head of the orga­ni­za­tion and with the way that sta­tis­tics are pro­duced and made pub­lic.
The obser­va­tions and argu­ments of Dr. Garth Rattary sup­port and bears out 8‑years of work that I have per­son­al­ly pro­duced on this subject.
In fact, I have con­sis­tent­ly said that the secu­ri­ty forces and maybe the Police, in Particular, have no one to blame for the cre­ation of INDECOM and as such they must live with it.

My con­tention is and has always been that a law can­not be a tool of sup­pres­sion, or oppres­sion (which INDECOM) is, laws must be clear lines of demar­ca­tion for all parties.
Regardless of the num­ber of time that we make this argu­ment that we are not opposed to over­sight, there will be a bunch of igno­ra­mus­es who are intel­lec­tu­al­ly unable to move past their hatred for the police.
Unfortunately, this mind-numb­ing idio­cy is not con­fined to civil­ians but even some half-baked idiots who claimed they were police officers.

Terrence Williams con­tin­ues to manip­u­late and cher­ry-pick data to sup­port his point of view as it relates to police shootings.
Dr. Rattary bril­liant­ly spoke to Williams’ lack of verac­i­ty. “For my part, I feel that INDECOM sta­tis­tics regard­ing police killings need to con­comi­tant­ly reveal the num­ber of cit­i­zens killed by crim­i­nal ele­ments dur­ing that rel­e­vant peri­od. That would pro­vide a more bal­anced per­spec­tive on the lev­el of dead­ly crimes that require a response from the police”.

Criminal Rights Society:

Terrence Williams, in a March 12, 2018, Observer Article, talked about Police offi­cer shoot­ing and killing more sus­pects than they are wounding.
The idea that police offi­cers use of force which results in the death of the sus­pects. Seated at the table with Williams was Hamish Campbell the British import sec­ond­ed to Jamaica.
INDECOM claimed that there is an expec­ta­tion that casu­al­ties from secu­ri­ty force shoot­ing inci­dents would result in more indi­vid­u­als being wound­ed than killed.…
I am unsure where the data in sup­port of that claim comes from, or even whether there is any evi­dence in sup­port of such friv­o­lous claim com­ing from some­one who has no train­ing or expe­ri­ence to make those claims.
On the very face of it, the cher­ry-pick­ing of data is not only disin­gen­u­ous it is down­right dis​hon​est​.It goes to the lack of char­ac­ter of Williams and the senior lev­el man­age­ment of INDECOM.

Jamaica is one of the most mur­der­ous places on earth, last year alone 1616 homi­cides were report­ed to the police in a coun­try of 2.8 mil­lion peo­ple crammed togeth­er in a land space of 4411 square miles.
The sug­ges­tion that offi­cers are killing more than they are wound­ing gives the impres­sion that police chose to get into gun bat­tles in which they stand a 50 – 50 chance or worse to get killed.
It also sug­gests that offi­cers get to deter­mine whether they respond to shoot­ers when they do engage Jamaica’s mur­der­ous gangsters.

As some­one who has been shot in the line of duty, I can tell you that the dif­fer­ence between life and death is almost always a mat­ter of instinc­tive reflex.
The fun­da­men­tal dif­fer­ence between the fac­tu­al response to life and death sit­u­a­tions which war­rant lethal force and the dem­a­goguery prof­fered and pro­mul­gat­ed by INDECOM is simple.
(1) Police offi­cers are trained to shoot at the upper extrem­i­ties of a sus­pect if and when the neces­si­ty aris­es to use lethal or dead­ly force. Many offi­cers will go through their entire career and may nev­er have to fire a sin­gle shot at any­one. Conversely, those offi­cers who are pressed into dai­ly ser­vice in the most vio­lent neigh­bor­hoods are not only duty bound to respond to threats against their lives, that of their col­leagues and the cit­i­zens they are sworn to pro­tect, they get no joy at hav­ing to defend their lives for a few dollars.

Let Examine Shootouts

(2) The notion that police offi­cers have the option to shoot to injure some­one when the offi­cer’s life or that of anoth­er per­son is in per­il is fan­tas­tic and down­right unin­formed of what occurs in a shootout.
Police offi­cers do not get to say to a vio­lent heav­i­ly armed sus­pect,“wait, stand still so that I may shoot to injure you”. Said Dr. Rattary on that matter:

“INDECOM’s insin­u­a­tion that police should aim to wound and not kill dimin­ish­es its vaunt­ed objec­tiv­i­ty and author­i­ty and makes it seem total­ly unaware of the basic tenets of mor­tal engage­ment.”
“If an offi­cer of the law feels threat­ened by any­one, even an unarmed indi­vid­ual, he or she will be with­in his or her rights to use dead­ly force because the aggres­sor may over­pow­er him or her and use the acquired dead­ly weapon to kill, as hap­pened on April 28, 2017, when a sus­pect wrest­ed the ser­vice pis­tol away from a police­man and killed him with it”.

(JFJ) ENEMY OF THE STATE?

Terrence Williams has been using the play­book of Jamaicans for Justice the anti-police for­eign-fund­ed lob­by and its ini­tial con­venor Carolyn Gomes for years. Gomes was even­tu­al­ly exposed as a decep­tive con­niv­ing decep­tive fraud who pro­vid­ed explic­it, homo­sex­u­al mate­ri­als to vul­ner­a­ble under­age kids and was forced to step aside in dis­grace. As the leader of JFJ she mali­cious­ly and duplic­i­tous­ly used cher­ry-picked data in for­eign forums to smear the police.

Unders Gomes’ lead­er­ship JFJ ‘s prin­ci­pals would attend con­fer­ences in Washington DC and used cher­ry-picked data to report on what they char­ac­ter­ized as extra-judi­cial police killings.
The data was usu­al­ly raw num­bers of peo­ple killed in con­fronta­tions with the secu­ri­ty forces.
The data did not include the num­ber of Police offices killed or injured in those con­fronta­tions, did not include the num­ber of weapons recov­ered from those encoun­ters, did not include the inher­ent vio­lence in the gang mem­bers who engage law enforce­ment, did not include the num­ber of inno­cent Jamaicans killed with­in the peri­ods of their reporting.

Under Carolyn Gomes’ instruc­tions, the raw num­ber of those killed were lift­ed and used to make their argu­ment for extra­ju­di­cial killings and alleged police mis­con­duct so they could get more mon­ey from her for­eign handlers.
From the moment INDECOM became a real­i­ty Terrence Williams shared stages with Gomes and oth­er crim­i­nal rights lob­by, the police object­ed on the grounds that Williams was lob­by­ing as JFJ was, which dis­qual­i­fies INDECOM and Terrence Williams as an impar­tial investigator.
The Bruce Golding Government did noth­ing to muz­zle Terrence Williams. This carte blanch to do as he please gave rise to spec­u­la­tion that the for­ma­tion and sub­se­quent word­ing of the act were dic­tat­ed elsewhere.

Terrence Williams has been play­ing from that play­book ever since and it needs to come to an end if our coun­try is to have reli­able objec­tive over­sight of agen­cies of the state and a soci­ety which empow­ers its offi­cers to go after dan­ger­ous criminals.
Jamaica will con­tin­ue to pay a very high price in blood because its lead­ers have mort­gaged out our sov­er­eign­ty in order to be able to obtain loans and grants.
The Appellate court has ruled that INDECOM has no pow­er to effect arrests. That has been my per­son­al con­tention for the 8‑years that this destruc­tive law has been in effect. Jamaica has tal­ent­ed Lawyers, Jamaica has 63 mem­bers of Parliament some of whom are lawyers, not one of the 63 frauds have ever stood up in sup­port of the Police.
Now that the courts have spo­ken not a sin­gle one of the 63 retards have stood up in defense of the Police department.
What a rep­re­hen­si­ble bunch of crim­i­nal sup­port­ing imbe­ciles? In no oth­er coun­try on earth would you see this except Jamaica.

Terrence Williams knows quite well that nei­ther the JLP nor the PNP will move to change any­thing fun­da­men­tal in the act. After all almost half of INDECOM’s bud­get comes from dark monies com­ing in from overseas.
The most impor­tant take­away, how­ev­er, is that the fun­ders of INDECOM would not tol­er­ate an INDECOM in their coun­try. They pay homage to their law enforce­ment agen­cies every chance they get.
They are cru­cial­ly aware that if they can keep Jamaica impov­er­ished they can keep her depen­dent on their loans. That depen­den­cy is a sure­ty in a vio­lent crime-rid­den soci­ety like Jamaica.