Police case dismissed

The case in which 14 police officers sued the Police Service Commission (PSC) for excluding them from a list of promotions four years ago, has been dismissed.

High Court Judge Margaret Reifer this morning threw out the case which began last year.

An upset attorney Ralph Thorne, QC, who represented the disgruntled officers, strongly disagreed with the judge’s ruling.

He reiterated his position that the PSC had no authority to reject the recommendations of then Police Commissioner Darwin Dottin and substitute its own names.

From left to right, Sergeant Richard Boyce, former Commissioner of Police Darwin Dottin and Assistant Superintendent of Police John Maxwell.

“We disagree entirely with the decision, with the legal findings, we disagree entirely with the findings of fact. We wish to emphasize to the public in a matter of the public interest that here it is you have a case of promotion, contested promotions, in which the chairman of the Police Service Commission came to the court and admitted that on the question of promotions that they rejected the recommendations made by the commissioner and exercised their own initiative and substituted names of their own,” Thorne said.

The Queen’s Counsel is contending that under the promotions rules that was wrong.

He was further adamant that when the commissioner makes recommendations, as he is entitled to by law, and he sends them to the PSC, that body has no legal authority to substitute its own names.

8 Responses to Police case dismissed

  1. Sherlock Holmes. December 23, 2016 at 3:29 pm

    Hmmm it appears that justice has been served wuhloss.

    Reply
  2. Lennox hewitt December 23, 2016 at 4:19 pm

    Well Sherlock Holmes is the best was the best Detective lol

    Reply
    • Sherlock Holmes. December 24, 2016 at 5:29 am

      Yes sir i was one of the best.

      Reply
  3. Jennifer December 23, 2016 at 6:06 pm

    I wonder What was the criteria to go onto the promotion list????

    Reply
  4. David Gittens
    David Gittens December 23, 2016 at 8:08 pm

    How did the judge rule???

    Reply
  5. Jack Husbands December 23, 2016 at 8:23 pm

    I can’t understand the QC’s comments. Whether a lawyer in a case agrees or disagrees with the court’s decision is completely irrelevant to anything except an appeal or an allegation of bias against the judge. The learned QC could complain about the length of time the proceedings took but not that the decision went against his clients. I could never understand the American habit of lawyers of ripping apart the decision or the decision-maker after delivery of the judgment. Leave the ripping apart to commentators not involved in the suit. Otherwise it is a Trumpism – you only accept the result if you win. But I only went to 7th standard so what do I know.

    Reply
  6. Charles December 24, 2016 at 7:34 am

    @jack husbands what are you talking abou?utter rubbish sir.Any lawyer has the right to offer his opinion on the decision of the court base on the law.Judges ere in law and this is exactly what Mr Thorne is pointing to as a result of what the law states exactly who can make recommendations because the commission is the body who act on those recommendations rather than the ones who should be offering their recommendations.Yes the attorney has a right to appeal ,but he is giving notice to the public because it’s in the interest of the public and our right to know sir .

    Reply
  7. Rev. Winston Jones December 24, 2016 at 12:20 pm

    Based on the statement of Mr. Thorne, if it is to accepted as accurate, then there are ample grounds for appeal which makes the grounds for dismissal very pertinent. Is there, in the opinion of Judge Reifer, a preponderance of evidence nullifying the argument of the officers or some error made in the presentation of the case or an absolute error in the interpretation of the applicable laws by both Mr. Thorne and the officers in question such as to make their case mute and to be dismissed? I await the next move with baited breath.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *