KINGSTON, Jamaica – Head of the police’s Corporate Communications Unit (CCU) Deputy Superintendent Steve Brown was warned by Justice Lennox Campbell to exercise caution in the wording of press releases when he appeared in court Monday in the Vybz Kartel murder trial

Brown was summoned after defence attorney Tom Tavares-Finson complained about a release from the unit which said the house of a police witnesss in a “high profile case now before the court was fire bombed” is prejudicial against the accused.

“My job is to ensure that persons who come to these courts are accorded their full constitutional right which is a fair trial. I have to balance between the rights of the freedom of the press and the rights of accused persons,” Campbell said.

However Brown attempted to explain that the wording used in the release was not intended to prejudice the case.

“There is more than one high profile case before the courts now,” said Brown.

“There is the light bulb one, ATL, the one with Mr Forbes and Mr Bicknell. We said high profile and someone picked on a particular case,” Brown told the court.

Karyl Walker

0 thoughts on “CCU RESPONDS TO JUDGE

  1. If a witness in the kartel case get hurt the police fe hide it ? No it should be reported and outlined that there are attempts to intimidate witnesses and hopefully it will prejudice the case so we can get rid of the john crow and him crow bait followers.

  2. Exactly!!!!…mek Finson guh chuck off of a lovers leap and drop inna a volcano and dead!!!. Damn ass. Mi nuh wrong him still, gwaan dun the sketel money.

          1. Under the Jury act, especially there is a section which speaks to anything outside which could prejudice a case. but the mere fact that the release spoke to “high profile case” “police witness” merely speak to the Kartel case……”merely”

          2. as the ccu head seh there are many before the court and we nuh know which police ina di res a case dem..we do have details of kartel own but not the others…but suppose there was someone whey know details pan all..what there would make them believe is kartel case…di kern spencer trial high profile to

          3. KK, you use the term ‘merely’ as a student of law you know ‘merely’ has no bearings in procedural law. You can build yu theory on ‘merely’ but it can easily be challenged. Finson knows and his attempt to WIN this case is an absolute INSULT to the courts .

          1. No Bias, You can’t find no sheep ova yah? DWLn Poor thing. remember yu sey next week yu king a touch road… so be de case you will find many like minded persons to reason/celebrate wid. Yu can pick pon ME first.

      1. Hey Met. Both the Judge and CCU responded to finson nonsense accordingly. De bum dem cannot appeal using that charge/argument and CCU highlighted the fact that more dan one case de a courthouse. dwln

      2. @Met.. they answered perfectly… big counteraction!

        i have a question..
        it may have been asked before an i missed it..

        i take it when they say “voicenote” it is an actual audio note,
        and i take it that these “voicenotes” where played live in court.
        if this is so..
        has anybody outside of the court heard these voicenotes and has kartels voice been positively identified?

        and simular questions about the video?

        i was going to ask if kartel was going to take the stand,
        but i think the case is nearly close now??
        if he’s not, how come?
        whats the ruling on this?

        rispek & honour Met
        & MetPeople

    1. Not if the jury’ sequestered, and that isn’t public knowledge in this case. A good jury pool knows how to sequester themselves. Are you alleging that this jury is easy to corrupt?

      1. Ok. But at this point the actions of the defense is repulsive. All of Finson’s and the other members of the defense tactics are propagandist tactics.

        1. Well Phantom you seem to know about the law as well, and we all know justice is very expensive, also, there is also no black or white area, but how the lawyers argue in court. Lets see ih case R v Galbraith will be put into effect in this case

          1. I strongly doubt that case applies here. Wee wasn’t ruled out as a witness, the timelines fit and the VOICENOTES along with the missing victim carries weight.

          2. But you are right about the defence tactics….lol…but a drowning man clutcheth to a straw…and I know Tavares, would hate to lose this case…lol…so him a draw fi di big guns

          3. De big gun barrels HOT so him gwan have fi let dem go to…lolol. Him and Warmy can go into retirement together shortly. After this case him have no place inna legal society.

  3. Well,a jury is also unpredictable, and even though it’s the judge’s role to interpret the law, “with proper guidelines” he has to be fair in guiding the jury, or he could be found to err in his judgement…

    1. That nah go win eida. This judge as tolerated alot of shannigans from the defense (entertained as well) I doubt an appeal in the highcourts will find that the judge erred…dem more to find him to be a patient rass man.

      1. *excuse me as and ray ray errors* me patios is always interfering in my train of “proper” thoughts. lol along with the expletives.

  4. I actually think it was a clever ploy by the police. Given the sheer vagueness of the statement, they cannot be accused of intentionally attempting to prejudice the jury, however, we can and will all draw inference from the most ‘high profile’ case as to who the culprit is.

    1. lolol…you do have a valid point. I think it’s a PDA fi de future criminals going before the court to argue about their cellphones and to let them know ” there’s a receipt for that” lol.

      For the international watch groups: if the followers get unruly after the verdict they must remember that they have now been put on notice because on of their own as committed a felonious act against an officer of the state because of said, inferred ‘high profile’ case..

  5. Metty my sis ! where art thou ? u gawwwwn lef mi ? lol….Met, there’s a service on TB Joshua u need to see, it’s about a homosexual eing delivered…

  6. Why him always a worry bout di media suh? Wen di reporting a guh in his favor Him shut up doe! Him jus a dash wud all ova di rass place an a hope somn connect lol Wen a nuh conspiracy, a media, wah di hell it a guh be tomarrow?

  7. MET U SEEM VERY BIAS IN THIS CASE! there is a thing call “due process” whether u like kartel or not, the police keep doing some dumb / unprofessional stuff eg; that press release then they going to tell judge there is a lot of high profile cases b4 the court there just insulting the judge in that manner cause kartel case a the only suspected phone tampering and so call witness imtimidation!!! NO PRESS RELEASE ON KHAJEEL MAIS , NAKIA JACKSON

    1. met all a argue down the law student dem…lol …. all the one phantom.. sound fool like. if you believe the man is guilty that’s one thing but to excuse the police and their unprofessionalism and to disregard the procedures of the court like they don’t matter is kinda ignorant in my opinion 🙂

      the most damaging evidence in this trial is the text messages but in reality those should not even have been admitted to court. police already admit they don’t know what they doing and the phone was clearly tampered with. they say trial is won or lost b4 it even go to court so we will see or just wait for met and Phantom to explain to us what is going on ….

  8. The Judge is doing the right thing! by closing all loop holes for an appeal, which is sure to come, if a guilty verdict is reached. If there is any semblance of impropriety the appeal court will throw it out.

  9. The only aim of the police and prosecution is to prejudice the jury .If that was not the case they wouldn’t have arrested the person .Therefore the arguments of police trying to influence the verdict is dead in the water .The whole aim of any detective is to do just that .Another thing ,the case was turned over to the prosecution therefore the police influence is just like the influence of any other organizations.What next,throw the case because klans say somn?

    1. At the end of the day, citizens has the right to know what is going on in their country. The police has a right to speak to the press. As the officer stated , there are a number of high profile cases going on in the courts, who is to know that in any of those cases witnesses has not been threatened and also killed. don’t you think it is a responsible police force that would have released a statement as such, without compromising the case or the witness? The police did not mention any names, therefore it is only an assumption in the part of those who thinks they are referring to kartel.

Leave a Reply

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

Back to top