Police went well beyond the bounds of acceptable practice in a ?forward-thinking society?, defence counsel Mark Pettingill has claimed.

Addressing Puisne Judge Carlisle Greaves in his final submissions in the pre-trial proceedings, Mr. Pettingill accused narcotics officers of lying under oath in order to cover up their part in an operation ?which went badly wrong?.

?All three defendants were subjected to oppression, physical abuse and mental manipulation,? he said.

?They were denied access to an attorney after being arrested, were driven around in Police cars for hours afterwards being interrogated while they were subsequently all to be taken to the Prospect narcotics which is not a designated Police station. This kind of Police behaviour cannot be tolerated. To rule against us in this case would be to issue a license to Police allowing them to behave improperly. While I appreciate the job of Police officers is not easy, this sort of procedure can and has to be done well.

?For them to concoct a farcical story about Mr. Madeiros sustaining his injuries through a fall while attempting to escape custody, a claim categorically undermined by their own forensic expert, is I would suggest a disgrace, and ultimately paints the Bermuda Police Service in a very bad light. ?This case has got to lay down a standard for how Police behave in the future,? he concluded.

?You cannot cheat the letter of the law. You cannot cheat the proper process. If you cheat, you lose.?

Speaking to in the aftermath of the ruling, Mr. Pettingill conceded this was not the first time he had taken on cases such as this one, while stressing he would be ?very, very surprised? if charges were not brought against the Police officers involved.

?Our job was to raise an element of doubt that the Police statements given by the three defendants were not voluntary ? and the ruling was made on the basis of that doubt,? he said.