The circumstances surrounding news reporter Rehani Isidore’s attempted suicide while in police custody last month remain murky. What is quite clear is that the whole affair has cast dark shadows on the way the police handled that particular matter. Nevertheless, the police insist they treated the case as they would any other similar matter; that they went by the book and remain confident that the outcome of the case will prove there was nothing unusual about the arrest and processing of Rehani Isidore.
In a related sitdown this week, Wayne Charlery, ACP Responsible for Crime and Intelligence Management, expressed relief that Isidore is in good health following his ordeal. Charlery insisted that Isidore was treated with respect by the police, regardless of what some had stated online.
“I don’t think our image has taken a hit with respect to that case at all,” said the officer. “Sensible Saint Lucians, who actually take a bit of time to digest what happened, would know who ultimately was responsible. They would realize that the police did only what they are expected to do in such matters. We did everything in our power to ensure that the presentation of the evidence in that case will see justice being served. Whatever the results of the case, however, I am satisfied with how my men handled the suspect while he was in their custody.”
Miguel Fevrier, president of the Media Association of Saint Lucia, declined to comment on Isidore’s case, despite mounting criticism of the coverage given it, or lack thereof; or the preferential treatment afforded the bomb threat suspect, compared with similar cases covered by him and his colleagues.
Charlery provided the RSLPF’s rationale behind the release of Isidore’s name to the public: “Understand that the attempted suicide charge would have come as a result of him being brought in for the bomb hoax charge. So both charges are inextricably linked. If you never had a bomb hoax suspect, you’d probably not have the attempted suicide suspect. So those charges, as I’ve said, are joined at the hip. We couldn’t have charged Isidore for the bomb hoax without also publicizing the charge of attempted suicide due to this link. Remember, it’s the same person in question for both incidents.”
On the media coverage of the case, Charlery had this to say: “This matter was very interesting from a media coverage standpoint. At no point, though typical, did you hear: ‘Senior police officer has indicated the suspect of the bomb hoax is Rehani Isidore.’ Why was that? For once, as your paper’s publisher alluded to regarding this case, the media cooperated fully with the police. There was no hounding of the suspect or his family. There was no hounding of the police for information regarding the suspect. I was at the hospital visiting the young man. At no point was there any camera or camera-phone in my face, accompanied with questions about Rehani. Clearly in this case the media cooperated with us. Until one of their own got caught, they were unrelenting; oftentimes saying things like, ‘It’s our right,’ and ‘The people need to know!’ Now the media can be held to the standard it has set in this case. If they drop below those standards, we can ask: Why are you operating one way for this case but, with Rehani, you did something totally different? From our perspective, as police, we wish the media would in all cases operate as they did with Rehani Isidore. I will constantly remind them to continue doing the right thing, as they did with Rehani.”
