3466769
Former police commissioner Gary Griffith.

Former Commissioner of Police Gary Griffith has written the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) Mr Roger Gaspard, SC about what he calls the “failure of the TTPS to launch a transparent investigation surrounding the removal of the merit list for commissioner of police.”

The following is the letter to the DPP from Gary Griffith:

Please find below, several pieces of correspondence submitted to the Acting Commissioner of Police Jacob, from myself whilst in the post of Acting Commissioner of Police and after I left office.

After several months, there seems to be a deliberate refusal to commence these investigations or possible plans to have it influenced. I say this, as Acting COP Jacob decided to have a senior officer in Special Branch, who is responsible for the security of the Prime Minister and who reports directly to the Prime Minister, to be the sole authority to ascertain if these matters even warrant an investigation.

I deem this decision shocking and reeks of a possible blatant cover up, as one simply has to refer to E Mail Gate, which comprised no complainant, and not one shred of proper evidence, but was thoroughly investigated by TTPS then, as it was deemed a matter of public importance and national interest of alleged criminal activity by persons in high office.

The difference in this matter, however, is that there is concrete information and documentation that improper behavior did take place, involving several issues of wrongdoing, which are as follows:

  1. Whether the PSC had the authority to ignite an investigation, and hire someone to investigate matters within the TTPS.
  2. Ministers in the National Security Council received a report from Mr. Barrington of alleged criminal activity. This report was then given from someone in the NSC to the media [ Express newspaper]. Whoever forwarded this report, by forwarding it to the media, would have then tipped off possible suspects and under the Proceed of Crime Act, would have broken the law.
  3. Ministers in the National Security Council received a report from Mr. Stanley John, who decided to forward a report that he drafted for the PSC, but in a curious manner, also sent it to the NSC. This report was then given from someone in the NSC to the media [ Express newspaper]. Whoever forwarded this report, by forwarding it to the media, would have tipped off possible suspects and under Proceed of Crime Act [ POCA], would have broken the law.
  4. The report from Mr. Barrington is reported to involve accusations of possible criminal activity. Mr. Barrington should then be interviewed and forward such evidence to the Police. If his report and accusations are false, he should be charged for wasting police time and making a false report, but it is alarming that to the best of my knowledge, he conveniently has submitted this to politicians and refused to report it to the Police.
  5. The report from Mr. Stanley John is reported to involve accusations of possible criminal activity. Mr. John should then be interviewed and forward such evidence to the Police. If his report and accusations are false, he can be charged for wasting Police time and making a false report.
  6. The President, by law, when she received the Merit List, was obligated to do nothing other than forward it to Parliament. She refused to do so. If she was influenced, intimidated or instructed by anyone to do other than what was law, that public official can be charged for misbehavior in office.
  7. The previous PSC Chairman rescinded the Merit List from the President after delivering it. There was nothing giving her authority to seek to rescind this Merit List after it was delivered. If any public official ordered, directed, interfered, influenced, or coerced the previous PSC Chairman to rescind the Merit List, then that public official can be charged for misbehavior in office. We are now seeing that the Prime Minister has openly admitted in interfering with an independent process from an independent body, whether it be influencing, intimidating, directing or coercing, it means that he interfered, which can lead to someone being charged. This must be grounds for an investigation.
  8. The previous PSC Chairman attempted and suspended a sitting Police Commissioner without approval from the PSC. She informed them that I was interfering with an investigation. Mr. Stanley John however submitted correspondence to state that this was a lie. This can amount to misbehavior in office and even sedition.
  9. The previous PSC Chairman refused to reinsert me even when told to do so by the majority of the PSC members. This too can amount to misbehavior in office.

These are not difficult investigations, as all it takes is to interview the previous members of the PSC, Mr. John, Mr. Barrington and members of the NSC, along with acquiring minutes from NSC meetings.

However, several months later, nothing has been done and there seems to be a deliberate attempt to cover up possible criminal activity by persons in high office. I seek your intervention and consideration as to the next steps in ensuring accountability.