police officers have been backed by Chief Justice the Hon. Sir James Astwood.

The angry Chief Justice blasted two Police officers and the Magistrates Court as he upheld a Supreme Court Appeal by Mr. Kent Douglas Gary Dill against a speeding conviction.

And he said Acting Sgt. Clive Nestrille Brown and P.c. Peter Stuart Mason that they had been lucky to escape conviction for assaulting Mr. Dill.

Mr. Dill had been spotted by the Police officers travelling at a speed of 73 kph, close to the Hitching Post on Middle Road, Somerset.

When stopped, the officers said that he had been "uncooperative, resentful, hesitant and hostile'' in giving his name and address. He was arrested but injured during the struggle to put handcuffs on him.

The Chief Justice said: "It transpired that Dill had given the Police officer his correct address. But the Magistrate came to the conclusion that the arresting Police officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the information given to him by Dill was not accurate.

"The Magistrate also found as a fact that no excessive force was used against Dill by the arresting officer and his accomplice.'' Arising from the incident Brown and Mason were charged with grievous bodily harm against Dill, but both officers were acquitted. Police officers have no power to arrest a motorist for speeding but can arrest someone for failing to give his name and address.

The Chief Justice said: "In my view the arrests were unlawful and these two respondents were very fortunate to be acquitted of doing unlawful grievous bodily harm.

"In my view it mattered not that the magistrate found as a fact that excessive force was not used. The arrest was one done without any lawful justification.

"The arresting officers knew, or should have known, what their powers of arrest were and they clearly exceeded their powers and their arrest cannot be supported.'' The Chief Justice said that the conduct of the Police officers could not be condoned and the public would be concerned at such high-handed behaviour.

He continued: "In the instant case what was Dill arrested for? Brown said he was arresting him for refusing to give his name and address and, because he could not give an account of the cycle he was riding on, that he suspected the cycle may have been stolen.

"These were not sufficient reasons for arrest and Brown should have known this. He was clearly exceeding his powers and, since Dill was injured by him and Mason, they should have been convicted for the unwarranted assault.

"I may be being hard on these Police officers but the courts have to be vigilant and, if the rights of members of the public are abused, they have the protection of these courts.

"Likewise, if the Police do their duty fearlessly, honestly and above reproach, they will have the protection of these courts also. But unwarranted unlawful behaviour will not be tolerated.'' The Chief Justice told lawyers that he was "displeased by the conduct in this case''.

Civil cases are pending against the two officers. Mason has since left the force and the Island.