Police have admitted that the arrest of a justice campaigner more than 18 months ago was “unreasonable” after he sued them for damages.

Eron Hill, the founder and executive director of the Bermuda Equal Justice Initiative, told The Royal Gazette that he felt “some sense of justice” but was unhappy with the time it took the Bermuda Police Service to resolve the matter.

“I am satisfied that they have admitted that they are wrong, but it’s still disappointing that public authorities are so hesitant to just fully admit they are wrong when they know they are,” he said.

He claimed the police targeted him and abused their powers in doing so.

Mr Hill filed a lawsuit against the Commissioner of Police and the Attorney-General after he was arrested by Sergeant Seymour Foote on October 4, 2024, for allegedly sending a “grossly offensive” electronic communication.

At the time of the arrest, the 30-year-old paralegal was already facing criminal charges of attempting to pervert the course of public justice through social-media posts and sending grossly offensive social-media posts to a police officer.

He has since been acquitted of all those charges after a Supreme Court trial.

The October 4, 2024, arrest outside Hamilton Police Station was in relation to a message posted on a BEJI social-media account on July 2 about an interaction Mr Hill had that day with a police constable in the Supreme Court.

Mr Hill claimed the constable assaulted him after telling him he was not allowed to be in an area of the court where he had permission to enter to assist a client.

The BEJI post suggested that despite Mr Hill filing a complaint about her, the constable’s alleged misconduct would be covered up because she was friends with more senior officers.

Sergeant Foote told him he was being arrested for having committed an offence under the Electronic Communications Act 2011, according to an affidavit sworn by Mr Hill in support of his application to pursue judicial review proceedings against the Commissioner of Police and the Attorney-General.

“Sergeant Foote informed me that he wanted to seize my phone, interview me and then bail me to return to HPS on a later date,” Mr Hill said in the affidavit.

He added: “I was visibly upset and perturbed. I was hurt, frustrated, disappointed and deeply traumatised by what was yet another example of the BPS abusing their powers.”

Mr Hill said in his affidavit that he suffered post-traumatic stress disorder after his earlier arrest in November 2023 and his lawyer told the BPS he would “voluntarily attend the police station upon request to answer any questions so as to avoid the traumatising and embarrassing effects that being arrested in public has on me”.

He said that during his interview under caution on October 4, 2024, Sergeant Foote told him he had planned to contact Mr Hill’s lawyer for that purpose but “just happened to see me at HPS on the date when he was heading to get food and decided to seize the opportunity to arrest me there and then”.

Mr Hill argued that the arrest was unlawful because there were no reasonable grounds for suspecting an offence and no necessity to arrest him.

The BPS filed a defence against his lawsuit, which included an affidavit from Sergeant Foote.

The officer said he was asked to investigate the BEJI message and his inquiry included interviewing the senior officers mentioned in the post, both of whom told him they were negatively affected, having had their “integrity and professionalism” called into question.

Brian Moodie, from the Attorney-General’s Chambers, for the BPS, told Mr Hill in an e-mail on November 26 last year: “I am prepared to indicate now that the legal basis on which the relief is being resisted is that the police had reasonable and probable cause for their actions based on the investigations conducted by the [officer].”

However, on December 16, after Mr Hill asked for disclosure of documents related to the arrest, Mr Moodie told him in an e-mail seen by the Gazette: “I have assessed the matter further and believe it is in the best interest of both parties to reach an amicable agreement.”

The lawyer wrote that they could discuss the wording of a consent order and the issue of costs and damages, adding: “In the event we cannot agree on damages, we could use the scheduled hearing date for assessment of same.”

Mr Moodie filed a notice of admission with the court on January 15 consenting to a declaration that the “summary arrest of the applicant … was unreasonable” and an order quashing the decision to arrest Mr Hill.

Agreement has not been reached on damages and a hearing date will be set for a judge to decide them.

A BPS spokesman said: “The Bermuda Police Service respect the judicial process and will await the outcome of the court matters referenced.”

He said Mr Hill’s allegation that he was assaulted by the constable in July 2024 was a public complaint that fell under the authority of the independent Police Complaints Authority.

PCA chairman Jeffrey Elkinson told the Gazette that the authority did not comment on specific cases.

He added that the usual process in relation to complaints about officers was for the police to send their investigative results, with a report and recommendations, to the PCA.

This report is then considered at the authority’s next board meeting, when it is decided “what steps, if any, the authority needs to take”.

• On occasion The Royal Gazette may decide to not allow comments on a story that we deem may inflame sensitivities. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers