The successful claim for damages filed by Sophia Louisy after the death of her son Mandy Louisy at the hands of police officers on August 9, 2013, apart from being just a small measure of comfort for the Louisy family, is a damning statement on police malpractice in this country—as if already the IMPACS fallout had not done enough to the image of the Royal Saint Lucia Police Force.
According to Justice Kimberly Cenac-Phulgence, who presided over the matter: “I picked up some inconsistencies in the evidence . . . ” That included PC Ternis Mc Vane’s statement that the deceased was armed with a knife and lunged at him, leaving him no other choice but to shoot in self defence. It is a line often heard from the police, and just as often accepted as truth by juries. Not by Justice Cenac-Phulgence on the occasion. In her judgment, she wrote: “Whereas I have no difficulty accepting that Mandy may have lunged at PC Mc Vane and they fell, and a struggle ensued, I have difficulty envisioning this scene with a knife in Mandy‘s hand . . . The knife just does not make sense in the sequence of events. I accept that there was a struggle. But I do not accept that Mandy had any knife. When I consider this along with other inconsistencies, I do not accept the evidence of the defendant as being totally credible.”
Several years ago, a disgraced police commissioner had, in his private capacity, shot and killed a young man at Reduit Beach. He later claimed the man had attacked him with a knife never presented in evidence. Few were surprised by Justice Cenac-Phulgence’s ruling: “I therefore find that the police officers were negligent in their handling of the situation and that this ultimately led to the shooting of Mandy and his subsequent death.” Sophia Louisy, as administratrix of the estate of her deceased son, Mandy Louisy, was awarded a total amount of $14,838.98 plus interest.
Acting police commissioner Milton Desir’s reaction to the ruling: “It’s the court’s decision. We have to abide by and respect it.” As for the future of the officer involved, Desir responded: “Well, it’s not up to the police what happens next. It’s a decision to be made by the DPP’s office. If there’s no appeal then the sum will have to be paid.” The DPP was not available for comment at time of writing.
Representing the family of the deceased were Sandy John and Mary Francis, the well known human rights advocate from the office of the National Centre for Legal Aid and Human Rights Inc, a non-profit human rights organisation. She described the decision as good and balanced: “When the incident took place six years ago, people were aware, true, but there was a lot of misinformation being spread. There was one story from the police, and another story from the relatives and eyewitness. But now the matter has been put right. I think justice has prevailed.”
She added: “The lesson from all of this is that people must be persistent and access to justice must be provided. Justice cannot be only for those with the money to pursue it. This decision arrived as a result of a civil claim. Still, who pays? The taxpayers pay for the wrong-doing of the police. When damages are awarded it is taxpayers who foot the bill. That’s why taxpayers should be concerned about their taxes paying for wrong-doing by police officers.”
Said Francis finally: “From time immemorial we have been living with a culture of impunity when it comes to lack of professionalism on the part of our police; some of them, at least. That is something Mr. Rick Wayne has devoted much time and countless pages to. As Sir Louis Blom-Cooper stated following an inquiry here several years ago, we have a culture that allows corrupt officials to get away with murder. The way this matter has turned out will, I hope, encourage a change in the way we look at our public officials.”
