AfriKa CRY BLOOD

The question of how I’Akobi met his death has still been left unanswered after approximately 10 months of deliberations both inside and out of court. Although the coroner had dismissed the idea of I’Akobi going to the cliff with the intention of taking his own life, the verdict of misadventure is still debatable.

In her context it was defined as the act of running from the police which inadvertently resulted in his death. Our family vehemently refutes the coroner’s claim in this regard; as the act of running towards what the police perceived to be a 60 ft. drop head first with hands outstretched in this ‘mad’ dash for freedom quintessentially describes the act of suicide.

Although the coroner removed the police’s postulations of why he had taken his life that being (depression, homosexuality, madness and drug association), she inadvertently or intentionally accepted the single report submitted by Headley and Walkes as the irrevocable truth.

How she arrived at this ‘reality’ still remains a mystery as she had not too long questioned the likeness of both officers’ statements (from the order of sentences to adjectives).

We are now firmly of the belief that the police are an autonomous body in Barbados and subsequently we must now call ourselves a judicial apostates as it relates to any interaction between this body and the general public.

This was heightened by the coroner’s dismissal of the event relayed to us (face to face) by both Dottin and Reece (the officers who informed us of a fatal accident where they had personally witnessed I’Akobi ‘iffing’ i.e. motioning as though he was prepared to leap over the edge of the cliff). The rationale for this decision she claimed to be miscommunication. This too was her explanation for not taking into account, the information (the leading of a squad i.e. more than one person as well as the sketchy details) relayed to us at the Holetown police station by Seargent Headley.

What is left to be surmised is that the police are free to tell the families of victims whatever they feel without being held accountable for their utterances.

Our family rejects the timeline fabricated/procured by the police and subsequently accepted by the coroner. There were residents who as early as 4:30 saw a congregation of police assembled at the cliff whilst the body was in the water, approximately one hour before the policemen were alleged to have arrived at the scene.

As with autonomy the police are also the official timekeepers and their standard is universally accepted as gospel.

The coroner’s claim that the ‘5 minute window’ did not present a large enough divide for such an occurrence, especially since the incident was in an open area, does not take into consideration events of brutality known to have occurred in Barbados.

The beating of the white and black patrons at the Kensington Oval provides a suitable enough analogy, where the police manhandled these patrons in the view of a cameraman and other eye witnesses.

Additionally, as it takes mere seconds for a body to land at the foot of a cliff, ‘5 minutes’ provides an ample enough window for this “fatal accident”.

Ultimately, she failed miserably in her role which was to allay the concerns of our family and the public. There still remains much misinformation disseminated by the police which she would like to have our family believe was a result of miscommunication. There remains the unexplored domain which she was reluctant to deduce. That being that as from as early as June the 18th when our family had talked to Sergeant Headley there was no consensus as to how he had died, Harvey’s subsequent involvement brought about solidity of the scenario (there were only two people who interacted with him and no more). This answers puzzling question of why the nine other officers who were at the scene could not validate these two policemen’s account. They were never intended to be material witnesses and to give them a significant role of witnessing the entire event especially after Harvey had completed his investigation would be succinctly dubious.

As Khalid Muhammad said whoever controls the diameter of our learning controls the circumference of our ability. The police provided this diameter with their fabricated report subsequently the coroner’s ability was then controlled and limited to their facts. It is therefore likened to the adage that a great house will sink in sand.

There must be a more sturdy impartial foundation to the proceedings of the coroner’s court if it is seeking to be a truly independent entity.

Tags: 5 minute window, Anthony Walkes, autonomous, Constable Sandra Dottin, Coroner, Curvan Harvey, depression, drugs, Holetown Police Station, homosexual, iffing, irrevocable truth, madness, Mandela Maloney, misadventure, miscommunication, police, Sergeant Trevor Reece, statement, sudden dash for freedom, suicide, timeline, unanswered, verdict, Wingrove Headley

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 30th, 2009 at 9:00 am and is filed under Coroner Inquest, News, Press Releases. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.