The corrupt action of a single indivi-dual does not necessarily translate to mean malignancy in an entire organisation. Except that there is enough anecdotal information about all forms of corruption in the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF).

This is why many persons are likely to be concerned over last week's act of conscience by Detective Constable Carey Lyn-Shue of the Montego Bay police and will have welcomed the response of ultimate boss, the police chief, Rear Admiral Hardley Lewin. The immediate suspension of the constable indicates that more definitive action will ensue.

The matter at hand involved a preliminary hearing into a charge of murder against Jason James, 22, that was taking place in the Montego Bay Resident Magistrate's Court. James was accused of being one of the murderers of Sheldon Shaw, 23, who was shot to death in Retirement, Granville, in April 2006.

Last week Constable Lyn-Shue informed the court that the statements that he submitted on the case, also involving a prospective prosecution witness, were false. He went this route, the cop said, because no one had come forward with evidence.

This unwillingness of witnesses to provide statements to investigators is common in Jamaica and is often a source of frustration for the police. It is sometimes proffered among the reasons for the high level of police homicides. Why, the argument goes, bring in criminals when witnesses will not come forward or smart lawyers will exploit a creaky and overburdened justice system to ensure the freedom of a guilty person.

Indeed, we can hear such a claim being made by cynics against Jason James. Already he is accused of being a member of the Killer Bee gang which has notoriety in St. James and is serving time in prison for an unrelated gun crime.

That approach, though, is wrong. Justice, after all, is universal rather than selective. If the Jason Jameses of the world cannot be assured of justice in accordance with the law and what is right, justice cannot be guaranteed for any person in Jamaica, regardless of his/her station in life. The process is similarly open to perversion.

Of course, we take Constable Lyn-Shue at his word that he is now telling the truth, that he lied in the first instance and had recanted because he had changed his life and decided to "walk the straight and narrow" and needed to be "true to himself".

The fact, however, that he had taken steps to committing perjury and perverting the course of justice raises a number of questions, not least of which has to do with the level of supervision and management oversight afforded junior police officers during an investigation. Are investigators debriefed? What quality standards does their work have to meet and what is the test of this? Do prosecutors rigorously review cases with investigating officers before court hearings?

Additionally, there seems to be an issue here about whether the leadership of the Area One police allowed a permissive environment for this kind of perversion to flourish. In this regard, it seems to us that Admiral Lewin needs to order a full review to discover the level of contamination - perhaps across the constabulary.