Age Concern Support Call For Investigation
Seniors advocacy group Age Concern Bermuda said they “support Premier Dunkley’s call into an investigation into the actions of police officers that occurred on Friday at the House of Assembly, saying that of “notable concern” is the “use of pepper spray and other possible forms of physical harm, seemingly without warning or physical provocation, on the seniors involved in the protest.”
Premier Michael Dunkley Requests Investigation
In a statement last night, the Premier said, “What transpired in Bermuda last Friday was disheartening to see and unacceptable. Let me be very clear, I don’t condone the violence that occurred against our citizens and was deeply troubled by what occurred.
“In this regard I have requested to Government House and the Bermuda Police Service that an investigation into the events be conducted and a report be completed for the Government on what happened and why.
“Our country is a democracy and no matter what our disagreements we must conduct ourselves in an appropriate manner.”
Opposition Leader David Burt Calls For Investigation
On Friday night, Mr Burt said, “The pepper spraying of senior citizens and others who have assembled in peaceful protest has no place in Bermuda. The images and videos from today cast a stain on our society that will not easily be removed.
“We strongly condemn violence in all its forms, by all persons. Today, our people were not violent; they experienced an egregiously violent response to their right to assembly.
“We call for an investigation into why members of the Bermuda Police Service dosed pepper spray indiscriminately into a crowd.”
Age Concern Statement
The statement from Age Concern said, “Age Concern Bermuda, seniors’ advocacy group, announced today that it supports Premier Dunkley’s call into an investigation into the actions of police officers that occurred on Friday at the House of Assembly.
“Of notable concern to the advocacy group is the use of pepper spray and other possible forms of physical harm, seemingly without warning or physical provocation, on the seniors involved in the protest.
The organization stating clarity is needed on when and how force of this nature is applied by the police and whether the tactics used by the officers was appropriate for the circumstances.”
Age Concern Executive Director Dr. Claudette Fleming stated, “I appreciate the calls, and many conversations of persons who have reached out to us from the time of the incident to inform us of their concern for the unfortunate turn of events that happened on Friday.
“As an advocacy group for seniors we will not discourage our members from exercising their democratic right to protest peacefully.
“But more importantly, we hear and understand the fears of those seniors who feel as though their voice is not being heard by legislators. We know many seniors would not take to the streets for a cause unless it was an issue in which they truly believe.
“We agree that law and order has a very important place in our society and; that its application must be used with the outmost sensitivity and discernment in maintaining the very peace that the police service exists to protect.”
Deputy and Advocacy Chairperson of Age Concern, Charles Jeffers indicated, “We fully support the Premier’s call for an investigation into the police services handling of the situation. There is certainly something that we can all learn from these events.”
If seniors want to protest in the manner they chose to (unlawfully), then they need to stop crying foul when the police take the same precautions they do everywhere else around the world. We are so fragile on this island. Like soccer players before and after they get fouled…so tough one minute…on the ground wincing the next.
How do you know they were protesting unlawfully? The protest itself was not unlawful, only the blocking of the entrance was unlawful.
Further, is it me or did anyone else take issue with Commissioner of Policy Michael DeSilva saying that police had lawfully used the pepper spray? He is stating that even before they had completed or even started any investigation to look into the use of it!
I hope Dunks investigation is gonna be like de JetGate investigation.
Oh for Gods sake.
What next.
These aged radicals and rent a mob knew exactly what they were doing.
They had nothing to loose.
Pepper Spray. Nothing compared to tear gas and being beaten with a baton.
They were used and new it that’s why such defiance but guess what; you don’t f off a policeman and push them and hit them when your told to move, disperse so many times over hours.
Next week they will bring out people in wheelchairs
Dislike all you want.
If the AC still happens it will be the last time people will see sustainment.
Glad I live in London on a freebee and the dole……………..
Rent a “W&E” guy……………………..
Guy stood over a shovel for 50 years……………….
Burt is lying.
” Today, our people were not violent; they experienced an egregiously violent response to their right to assembly.”
That’s just utter BS.
UBA~United Bermuda Alliance calls for an investigation as well
BPS should Not Investigate BPS
Health of a Society is Judged by the Behaviour of the Children and the Treatment of the Seniors
“Make Bermuda Great Again”
“without warning”?? BS.
I just lost a lot of respect for Age Concern.
Me too. Sad that you chose to jump on the bandwagon. I will no longer be supporting you with my donations.
Watch the whole video you will see the ring leaders setting up the “front line”, of seniors at the gate minutes before the main police line approached. The leaders backed the seniors against the gate so they had nowhere to go. Then the other men pushed the police from the sides and rear causing a very dangerous crush at the gate. This was a tactic all day long and was orchestrated by the PLP.
Maybe “Age Concern” missed the article yesterday by The Centre for Justice
“Peaceful assembly must also be distinguished from activity that can constitute a criminal offence. By way of clarification, the law does not permit those gathered for assembly and protest to block public access ways or rights of way.
“Section 12[c] of the Parliament Act 1957 provides that any person who wilfully interferes or attempts to interfere with the free exercise of any member of Parliament or Senator of their duties commits an offence.
in typical bermudian fashion we focus on the effects of consequences instead of the cause of the issue.
burt made a rallying call to his devotees to descend on and to disrupt Parliament. people including seniors disobeyed police orders. people including seniors were sprayed with an incapacitor in an attempt to disperse the crowd. the seniors were not deliberatedly singled out and sprayed. to suggest that they were is pure propaganda.
what was the root cause? not what were the consequences for disobedience.
Just ripped my Age Concern card! Do NOT come looking to me for donations either!
And today again Chris Furbert turns up at Police Headquarters with his elderly folks and the guy in the blue shirt to complain and make a complaint.
Anyone see a patern here?
It’s all blatant intimidation and fueling the fires set by same.
Part two will make 1977 look like a Guy who gives a Fawkes display.
Peace.
as already said elsewhere – how has such gutter, mob behaviour suddenly been turned into such an innocent event conducted by innocent, sweet dear little Seniors as part of those who participated with the narrative of coming in peace. I saw part of it and it was NOT “dear sweet seniors” innocently being pepper sprayed. Age Concern – do your homework before jumping on the bandwagon – look at the videos and READ THE RULES OF LAW as stated by Centre for Justice.
Geesch – can’t wait to hear from CURB and anyone else coming out of the woodwork to weigh in on the disgusting events of Friday, that clearly showed the disgusting and REAL agenda and behaviour of a MINORITY of people that are PUSHING THEIR EVIL AGENDA DOWN OUR, the MAJORITY of voters, THROATS – day in, day out without end.
This was NOT A LOFTY event folks as now (trying) to be spread around. BLOCKING ACCESS to the HOA so as to not allow ELECTED MPs to conduct the people’s business is unlawful and you were given time and asked repeatedly to move. There was nothing lofty about your behaviour and disgusting actions and you need to get a grip and face the truth.
Funny how dunk can call an investigation into this but had nothing to with them being there or nothing to do with Dr. browns investigation… ya ok. Some may be blinded but not I.
The final result is squarely on the shoulders of David Burt clearly he called for the blocking of the MP’s to Parliament he is totally responsible for the encounter . no one else he was personnally calling people to have them attend they were hoodwinked and decieved. The airport deal has nothing to do with the PLP and BIU wanting a distruption. They need this this is the only way they can get back in …..BUT AT WHAT COST ….It is illegal to block the MP’s the police must do their job ….LOCK them up ALL OF THEM if needed What a disgrace PLP godfathers would be horrified …Maybe Bean was not that bad compared to this radical leader
I will not be donating any money next year to Age Concern.They have lost my confidence
How would you all like it if people went and block the PLP door way and would not let you in to your meeting I sure you would call the police.
You all should have had chairs for your elderly to sit in across the road. Not in among the ones with sticks
Truly Sad when the First thing a person thinks is ‘I will no longer donate’
‘As long as You stay Quiet, You can get My Money’
“KEEP YOUR MONEY”
i expect seniors to act wisely, share their wisdom and be the voice of calm reason…guess not.
Government is elected into ‘office’ not ‘power’ as they frequently like to claim.
– The ultimate constraint on the abuse of authority (office) is the peoples ability to withdraw their consent to being governed – and at any time, not just at elections. Without consent, authority enforced becomes power and government then becomes tyrannical. We never give ‘power’ to those we elect, we merely give them authority to act on our behalf. Today’s governing bodies are slowly mutating into tyrannies, because they are ignoring the principles of consent and are securing ‘power’ for themselves.
Statutes
– All Acts of Parliament are ‘statutes’ known variously as legislation, regulations or rules. They are not laws. Statutes are often incorrectly referred to as laws by ‘trained’ barristers and solicitors, but the correct interpretation would be ‘black letter law’ (meaning statutes) which are distinguishable from ‘law’ i.e. common law – and for a purpose, the purpose being that statutes and laws are different. If Acts of Parliament were laws they would be called ‘Laws of Parliament.’ Parliament knows the distinction which it quite rightly maintains. Look at any Act of Parliament and you will notice the absence of the word law – that will give you the first clue that there is a difference. Parliament maintains the distinction between statutes and laws because those ‘in the know’ use this knowledge for their personal benefit.
– A ‘statute’ is defined as a rule or regulation of a society – they are edicts of legislation used to govern that society. Statutes are subject to the consent of the society – and this is individual consent and not collective consent. We belong to society as a matter of choice.
– The distinction between a law and a statute is that a law applies equally to us all but statutes can be made to favour one sector of society over others, for example, people with disabilities are given preferential parking privileges (which is fair enough) and politicians have given themselves special dispensations re their expenses which the rest of us do not have (which is outrageous).