A disgusting reaction

May 27, 2002

Dear Sir,

I would just like to say how disgusted I am about the way in which some Bermudians reacted to the front page of on May 25, 2002.

I was listening to the talk shows on Sunday morning when I heard some people say that the picture of the Filipino dancers did not represent Bermuda Day.

I am a 16-year-old girl with a British/Bermudian mother and a Bermudian father; does that make me any less of a Bermudian?

Whether people realise it or not, they are telling younger generations that racism is all right, or at least this is the feeling that I get. Coming from an interracial family, I see both sides. I think that many people, of every race and culture, should look at the way they treat each other, from every word they say, to the gestures they make.

D.P.P speaks out

May 17, 2002

Dear Sir,

I refer to your editorial on May 14, 2002.

You say the double jeopardy "principle makes good sense; without it, prosecutors would be able to try and retry people, causing them months, if not years, of agony for crimes for which they have already been acquitted...."

You immediately go on to say "Bermuda has seen examples of something like this already, most recently in the case of Clifton Hopeton Morrison, who was the subject of several aborted Supreme Court trails."

How is it that "Bermuda has seen examples of something like" prosecutors trying and retrying people if the principle prevents it? What are those other "examples of something like this" that Bermuda has seen? How is the Morrison case an example of "something like this" when Morrison was never acquitted, but was the subject of "aborted Supreme Court trails"?

Your editorial reasoning suggests that the principle is not working in Bermuda; yet it "makes good sense".

Your use of the Morrison case is terribly misleading and a poor example to illustrate either the good of the double jeopardy principle or the abuse by prosecutors in its absence. Unfortunately this is not the first time I have seen this newspaper misconstrue the meaning and effect of the judgement of the Court of Appeal in the Morrison case or the facts of what actually occurred.

Given the magnitude of influence you have in shaping public opinion in this small community, with a stroke of your pen, you have a duty to not misinform or miseducate the public.

But your paper continually does just that, especially when it comes to matters concerning prosecutions. In this particular case your editorial has only generated misinformation and caused confusion on the issue.

I trust that on this rare occasion that I have bothered to comment you will publish this letter in its entirety, unedited. There was no intention to misinform or mislead in the May 14 editorial. "Something like" means "similar", not identical; the Morrison case was an example of a person being tried several times for the same offence. Obviously, since the principle of double jeopardy does apply in Bermuda, Mr. Morrison could not have been acquitted. Only a deliberate misreading of the editorial could have produced that conclusion.

The Dame Lois boob award

May 17, 2002

Dear Sir,

If there was an award for boob on the Hill it should go to Lois Browne Evans for not supporting Mr. Barritt's motion to amend the double jeopardy principle because he did not pass it through her office. The fact of the matter is if she were looking out for the interests of everyone on this Island it would have been through her initiative that it was introduced in the first place.

Mr. Barritt deserves credit for making an excellent case, and Mr. Dale Butler in particular should be commended for his support and entirely sensible and rationale argument.

If a case can be made that people who have been convicted of a crime be released in the event that compelling evidence is introduced which proves there was a miscarriage of justice, surely the same protection should be available to keep the despicable murders of Rebecca Middleton in prison for a very long time.

It is time that partisan politics are removed from decisions which so clearly affect the long-term welfare of the community.

Shame on Lois Browne Evans, and hats off to Dale Butler.

Old Town terrors

May 20, 2002

Dear Sir,

In the last year St. George's has been slowly terrorised, for want of a better word, by young high school dropouts and drug dealers/addicts.

The Government of Bermuda has done nothing but ignore this fact. If anything, they have said that these young trouble makers should be treated gently as they come from broken homes.

The Government has totally disregarded the fact that these young men have made the people of St. George insecure and frightened of walking their own streets after dusk. I know that only a year ago my husband and I would have dinner in the town and walk home; now we would never entertain the idea for fear of being stopped by a group of young thugs and beaten to an inch of our lives.

In the last few months, fights have broken out in the bars and restaurants of St. George on a regular basis and no one has been held accountable. The main reason being that the Police get there after the men have disappeared but also because the St. George's Police station usually only has enough officers to send two Policemen to handle large groups of unruly, drunken and violent men looking for a fight.

Obviously these gangs are laughing at the Police as they can get away with whatever they want with ease. It would seem the Police hierarchy feels the little town of St. George has no problems and the Police are not needed.

In actual fact, St. George is becoming the most dangerous part of Bermuda and is in desperate need of a large number of Police in groups patrolling the streets ready to control these large groups of violent men.

Just two weeks ago a quiet, law-abiding man was beaten to an inch of his life by a group of these troublemakers outside of Freddies bar. Still the Government has thoughts of taking away the Police presence completely by moving them to Clearwater while the town's station is repaired.

I hate to think what will happen. I wonder if Government has ever thought about what may happen to the banks without Police protection nearby on the island of St. George's if the Swing Bridge was stuck open for whatever reason!

I was recently informed by a Police officer that law breakers all over Bermuda are laughing at the Police and the judicial system because Government's policy is to be more lenient with them. They normally only have to spend one third of their sentence at Westgate Prison that has been described as a "holiday for men" by inmates!

Since coming into power the new Government has made it plain to all that they are only interested in doing what they want instead of what the people of Bermuda need! People have tried to show and tell them their problems and concerns and the Government turns their back on them.

Now I can understand why the Premier does not come forward to answer the questions of worried Bermudians - because she has no answers and does not care.

At least that seems obvious in the case of the St. George's Police station problems! I would love to sit down with her and listen to her explain the actions of her government. It is hard to believe that St. George is or was her home and she is ignoring the fact that it is being taken over by young punks looking for blood!

Women beware!

May 15, 2002

Dear Sir,

I am writing this, my first ever letter to the Editor, in order to warn women of the dangers that now exist in Bermuda.

At 3.20 last Friday afternoon I was held up at knife point in (the) Par-la-Ville parking lot. I was placing a parking sticker on my car window when I was grabbed around the neck from behind and told to give up my bag.

I tried to turn around to get a look at this person and was told to give up my bag or he would kill me. A short scuffle followed where I was pushed back into the car, and again told if I didn't give up my bag he would kill me.

This time the threat was accompanied by the prick of a cold knife being placed against my neck.

The attempted robbery was foiled by two gentlemen who drove into the parking lot, and seeing the attack in progress shouted out. One of these good Samaritans chased after the thief, and the other offered to get me some water, and to provide a description for the Police. I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to both Mr. Kenneth Burgess and Mr. Fred Richardson for being such exemplary citizens in coming to my rescue. Thank you.

Democracy in peril

May 21, 2002

Dear Sir,

The silence on the matter of the rejuggling of boundary lines for voting purposes is deafening.

Most Bermudians may yawn when it comes to subjects as complex as voting districts or amending the constitution, but they do so at their own peril. Loss of democracy is the price we will pay.

In The Economist magazine (April 27, 2002), there was an interesting article headed "How to rig an election". Every Bermudian should read it. Your newspaper should reproduce the article in full for public consumption.

It discussed American practices of gerrymandering the voting boundaries every ten years (census years) by both Democrats and Republicans, whichever party has the power to fiddle with the boundaries for their favour.

The article said, inter alia: "All you need is the power to draw district lines. And that is what America provides: a process, called redistricting, which, through back-room negotiations too boring for most voters to think about, can distort the democratic system itself."

It quoted "the champion of gerrymandering comes from Illinois" and, although Florida's electorate is "split perfectly down the middle, the map has been rigged outrageously to favour the Republicans".

In its final paragraph, The Economist says: "... politicians would naturally be reluctant to cede power ...citizens in Arizona, for instance, demanded a referendum to approve a redistricting commission in 2000 and, to the surprise of most experts, the measure passed".

The message for Bermudians is to wake up to the dangers of giving any government too much power. Our own constitution is sadly lacking in this regard and hands immense power to the majority party for up to five years without proper checks and balances.

We need a People's Right to Referendum (PRR) amendment in our constitution. In other words, the people's right to veto government policy by forcing a referendum. The threat of referendums is enough to force governments to watch ongoing polls which reflect majority opinion.

The people of St George's have shown us the way: if enough people sign a petition, an arrogant government should legally be forced to hold a referendum on the subject. It's a people's stop sign.