The Editor, Sir:

In recent times, the law has been amended to deal with the mischief created by the widespread and wanton killing, threatening or menacing of potential witnesses in criminal cases.

In seeking to deal with this problem the baby was thrown out with the bath water as, the prosecution was now allowed to lead evidence in the physical absence of a witness. This lies in stark contrast to the provisions of the Constitution of Jamaica that states in very clear language at section 20 subsection 6 (d) :

"Every person who is charged with a criminal offence - shall be afforded facilities to examine in person ... the witnesses called by the prosecution before any court ..."

An opportunity was thereby created for overzealous and sometimes dishonest police officers to create a witness, advise the court that the phantom witness was unavailable and have the court embark on what has been described as a 'paper trial'.

In these instances, the accused is denied the protection of the provisions of section 20 6(d) of the Constitution, that is, to "examine in person ... witnesses called by the prosecution before any court". To take this time-honoured right from any person is to create a virtual nightmare for the defendant who cannot use the searchlight of cross-examination to test the veracity of his accuser.

How many convictions?

It has come to light in a very tragic way, in the recent confession of one officer that he manufactured a witness in a murder case.

This has been the subject of previous complaint from other quarters of the Bar and I have personally witnessed two cases in which this mischief was uncovered.

It then begs the question; How many convictions in the past have been based on such 'testimony'?

This reprehensible state of affairs demonstrates that, notwithstanding the high crime rate, settled principles of law cannot be abandoned for what is often short-sightedly viewed as expediency.

I am, etc.,

BERT S. SAMUELS

bert.samuels@gmail.com

Attorney-at-law

4 Duke Street, Kingston