It is Godly and righteous that we forgive our brothers as Christ so charged us. When we commit an infraction we all wish that we may be forgiven and our record here on earth will remain pristine by our earthly judges. However, when we sin against God we never give a second thought about those transgressions, because most of us automatically assume that God Almighty is true to his word and he washes away the evidence of our transgressions.
Sure God washes away our transgressions but the scriptures tell us that there are conditions.
2 Chronicles 7: 14, If my people, which are called by my name,
(1)shall humble themselves, (2) and pray, (3)and seek my face,(4) and turn from their wicked ways;
Then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
So there are four predicates on which God’s forgiveness is premised, and most importantly his forgiveness does not absolve us from the physical consequences of our transgressions.
For example, a man who runs around having unprotected sex with women he does not know, will not be protected from sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancies and the associated costs that come with those. Neither is he protected from jealous rage of the paramours of the women he lays with, or the financial costs of interacting with the women.
Those are only a few of the consequences which God’s forgiveness will not wash away.
The difference with man’s forgiveness and God’s, is that God’s forgiveness, through premised on his stated predicates, is not influenced by race, gender, sexual orientation, station in life, or any other defining characteristics.
Man’s forgiveness has not always followed divine leadership.
It may very well be the reason that some Jamaicans are angry at the head of the Island’s traffic police Assistant Commissioner of Police, Bishop Gary Welsh’s response to a motorist who performed a dangerous stunt at a busy Saint Andrew intersection in a high-performance motorcar.
According to local reporting, the head of the police traffic division [Assistant Commissioner of Police], [Bishop], Dr. Gary Welsh arranged for the offender to show up to the location.
In tow was a gaggle of reporters and rubberneckers. The offender then apologized and promised not to ever repeat the actions which inexorably brought him to have to apologize. He then answered a series of questions from the media.
With the Bishop/Assistant Commissioner was a man whom, we are told is a lay magistrate.
As part of the event, the offender was made to promise to assist the police with a road safety campaign, which would teach motorist to respect the road traffic laws.
At issue in the minds of most critics, it seems to me, is the fact that the offender seemed to have gotten what they consider a sweetheart deal because he fits the profile of a light-complexioned uptown rich kid.
They argue that the same deference would not have been given to a darker-skinned Jamaican of lesser means.
It’s not always possible to assess the motives of others, neither is it always easy to weigh the calculations which goes into another person’s decision making on an issue.
As a consequence, I will leave the prognostication to others. Some pundits have even called for the resignation of the senior police officer, that is how unusual and egregious they view this incident.
The truth of the matter is that having watched the video of the incident several times I agree that this offender certainly committed several arrestable offenses. At one stage he narrowly missed colliding with another vehicle but it wasn’t enough to give him pause.
He persisted with the maneuver, obviously oblivious to the potential consequences of his actions.
The outrage and anger in what they see as special treatment meted out to the young offender, may have its genesis in the way people of darker hue have been treated in Jamaica and across the globe forever.
Nevertheless, the anger at the police who are searching for ways to bridge the divide between a badly damaged police department and the public may be somewhat misplaced.
Sure, the senior cop may not have weighed the perception the offender’s lighter hue would play to the larger society, but should we condemn him if his intentions were pure?
The angst and anger at the societal inconsistencies based on station, education, pigmentation, and other defining characteristics cannot be denied or ignored.
On the other hand, we should never lose sight of the fact that the issue had the blessing of a lay-magistrate who had the power under the law to dictate what the offender’s punishment would be.
As a firm believer in the rule of law and it’s equitable, just and fair dispensation, I am also aware that dispensation of this sort is not novel or new.
Judges, Magistrates, and Lay-Magistrates alike, have used all kinds of different remediating techniques to send the same message a monetary or custodial sentence would send.
The problem for most, is the fact that the senior cop may have abrogated the normal process by intervening in a matter they felt should have gone through the normal channels, (assuming they haven’t).
As a man of the cloth, the senior cop may have been moved to be compassionate. However, his role as a principal law enforcement officer may have collided with his Christian faith.
The contention that the Senior officer had no authority to abrogate the normal process of the courts is a sticking point.
That he had a Lay-Magistrate with him may give him some legal cover.
As for the court of public opinion and the optics, that’s a whole different kettle of fish.
Perception is sometimes reality, particularly in a society which reflexively hates the police.
Mike Beckles is a former Jamaican police Detective corporal, a business owner, avid researcher, and blogger.
He is a black achiever honoree, and publisher of the blog chatt-a-box.com.
He’s also a contributor to several websites.
You may subscribe to his blogs free of charge, or subscribe to his Youtube channel @chatt-a-box, for the latest podcast all free to you of course.
LIKE SHARE THIS ARTICLE