BPS Investigation Concluded, 15 Summonses

March 31, 2017

“The BPS investigation into the protest at the House of Assembly on December 2nd 2016 has been completed,” the police said today, adding that “to date, 15 people have received summonses to appear in court relating to a range of offences.”

Bermuda Police Service March 31 TC

A police spokesperson said, “There are three separate issues relating to the events of Friday, December 2nd 2016:

  • 1. The independent peer review report prepared by a senior UK police officer.
  • 2. The BPS investigation into allegations of criminal conduct by some protestors.
  • 3. The investigation into complaints by members of the public against police officers.

“The peer review into police actions was released by His Excellency the Governor on 28th March. The review was conducted by the National Police Coordination Centre [NPoCC] in London.

“The report contains an independent assessment by an experienced public order practitioner of the planning, command, and tactics used by the police along with ten recommendations to be considered. The use of incapacitant spray was not in the remit of NPoCC to comment on in their report.

“The BPS investigation into the protest at the House of Assembly on December 2nd 2016 has been completed and a number of files have been sent to the DPP for consideration. To date, 15 people have received summonses to appear in court relating to a range of offences.

“The use of incapacitant spray is the subject of complaints by ‎multiple members of the public and by law these matters were referred to the independent Police Complaints Authority. The results of the PCA’s review have not yet been announced.”

click here Bermuda protest on Dec 2nd

Read More About

Category: All, News, Politics

Comments (32)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. puzzled says:

    Looking forward to 2018.

    Be good.

  2. South Africa

    • Politricks says:

      Actually in South Africa protesters are murdered.

      Check out the Marikana killings from 2012.

      At least learn your history before looking like a fool with your comments.

    • Unbelievable says:

      Onion Juice, you really are a fool.

    • aceboy says:

      But South Africa is run by a strong black man. Now I am really confused.

    • James H says:

      OJ you are a complete idiot. Go to Africa if you think it will be better.

    • African says:

      thats why most people agree with the judicial system here. Democratic process where people go to court if they break the law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. if a copper says move you are in the way then common sense would say you should move, especially if they are wearing riot gear. It is only common sense. If you can’t control your emotions and protest in a democratic way then you deserve to be taken to court, or else, as you say, we will end up like south africa in the 80′s, or argentina in the the 70s and 80s. thats where we don’t won’t to be even though the opposition appears to want to drag us that way.
      so,,, after your South Africa comment i would love to know if you have ever been there, people love to throw around country names and have never been there or only visit the tourist spots. in reality you live in paradise and you probably have never even come close to the suffering that most people have and do continue to receive. Have you been places where your life can be taken by the government and nothing will happen, probably not and this is why people will agree with the democratic process here. much easier to face a judge than face a barrel of gun

      • Weed says:

        So the people who disagree with African would prefer being shot on the spot. Hard core plp sheeple

  3. NO MORE WAR says:

    This is a joke. This is a waste of taxpayer funds. By the look of it most if not all of these offenders do not have a criminal record and as such what is the most that will happen to them if found guilty? The courts are a joke and will certainly sentence them to an absolute or conditional discharge. the people have the power and should demand change at the polls. Reading the peer report it is clear that not only the protesters did wrong but all sides did. So let this be a learning curb for all. Just because someone breaks the law doesn’t mean they must be placed before the courts. If we are going to caution people for small amounts of weed why can’t we caution people for trivial offenses like the one mentioned in this article?

    • Politricks says:

      Shutting down the democratic process is not something I would consider to be a trivial offense.

      Especially as by doing so you are infringing on another’s democratic rights and freedoms.

    • Just the Tip says:

      It is this thought process that we have spoiled children and people who feel they can act anyway they want. The laws are the laws and people should be made to appear before the courts. Remeber there are at least two counts of assualt in this summons and they should be charged.

      • Make a new plan Stan says:

        Your comment is very interesting and gave me pause……there are spoiled children and people who think they can act anyway they want all over this island that is true.

        I notice however that there is understanding and forgiveness for some and very heavy penalties for others.

        Some people’s indiscretions are treated as phases while others are immediately considered to be irredeemable and menaces to society.

        Law breaking is not unique to one set of people but penalties seem to be handed out disproportionately on this island. The truth is who commits the crime is more important than the crime that has been committed.

      • Toleratate says:

        Well that’s just it. I agree 100% that people should exercise their right to protest or oppose an action they do not agree with; however they MUST also exercise their restraint when it come to carrying out illegal acts at the time, in the name of the protest.
        You can have a justified protest BUT at no time should an illegal act during that protest be considered justifiable.
        Even IF the courts decisions is a conditional discharge it is not considered a waste of time because if the individuals attempt to break the law at a later date; it can be drawn on.
        So the DPP and Police should do nothing and next time and next time and next time? Sound dumb when it’s explained this way right.

    • Infidelguy says:

      So what you’re saying is It’s Ok to break the law and you will be given a discharge as long as you don’t have a criminal record.

      And what the the protesters did that day is not equivalent to getting caught with a small amount of weed. The video footage clearly shows people actively confronting police officers in a very aggressive manner. In most countries that type of behavior would lead to at least one night in lockup. The law and law enforcement needs to be taken more seriously in this country. On December 2016, the police looked like inept fools and the people who were acting out aggressively looked like a bunch of uncivilized animals….including people that some of us refer to as “leaders”.

      Take it anyway you want.

  4. watching says:

    How can the investigation be completed when we don’t know who ordered the pepper spray?

    • Just the Tip says:

      What do you mean who ordered the pepper spray?? the officers in charge on the ground that is the clear and obvious thing.

    • Jus' Wonderin' says:

      The police did ya dummy…

    • Joe Bloggs says:

      “The protestors’ response became more aggressive and some actively resisted, prompting some officers to deploy incapacitant spray where they felt threatened by the actions of individual protestors.”

      There no order. It was individual choice by the police officers who felt threatened.

    • Weed says:

      Maybe because in a real country they would have been pepper sprayed as well and probably arrested.

  5. Hater Watching says:

    Come on wahoo, puzzled, Pat, steve and cooleagues – Show me how hateful you can be today!!!

    • puzzled says:

      “how hateful” ?

      No idea where that came from except generalization.

      Looking forward to 2018.

    • wahoo says:

      Not hateful and never have been. I am law abiding and always will be. Bermudian first and foremost. “Hater” in the sense that you are using it is a politically charged word and is used in place of any real argument. So I am not going to get drawn much more.

      I love you.

  6. BLIND SHEEP says:

    These people wanted an investigation and they got one. Now they want to cry foul because they did not get the result they wanted. Be careful what you wish for. It just may bite you in the a$$.

  7. Really says:

    It is illegal to block the entry of the house, they did and were ignorant about it, glad to see this is going forward. Tired of paying to live in a country where laws are not enforced.

    • sage says:

      Yeah, like drunk driving laws, drinking in public (except if you are homeless),fishing off the bridge, operating a boat drunk, loud mufflers, when big shots’ kids get arrested…

    • puzzled says:

      Get used to it.
      Compromise is the way to go these days.
      If your that “Really” tired you must have a plan.

  8. Ya serious says:

    FYI the Police carry Captor Spray everyday and don’t need permission or to be told when to use it. That is a call made by the Officers themselves. If they feel threatened, they can use it. Clearly they felt threatened. If you look at the belt of any patrol officer you will see it. Same goes for the Taser.

    • He's full of it says:

      They didn’t use spray from their belts. Watch the video again, they were given spray to use. For that to happen someone had to provide the extra spray.

      Thanks about it!

  9. cpm says:

    Hopefully Tweed will be on the next plane out after the court hearing

    • Brainiac says:

      and lets hope he takes the union leader furburt and the (sms) burgess and pop flip flop furbert with him They all used the people as human shields for their little political ploy