Log In

Reset Password

Police officers’ homes searched in hunt for source of leaked document

Commissioner of Police Stephen Corbishley (File photograph by Akil Simmons)

The homes of two police officers have been searched in a probe into the circulation of a document that detailed aspects of Commissioner of Police Stephen Corbishley’s private life, The Royal Gazette can reveal.

It is understood that the searches were made after copies of a court document were distributed among members of the police service.

It is believed officers seized phones and other electronic equipment in last Friday’s raids.

A police spokesman said yesterday: “A court warrant was executed at the homes of two police officers in relation to an ongoing investigation.”

But he added: “Due to the sensitive nature of the investigation, no further information will be provided at this time.”

An affidavit prepared by Deborah Corbishley, the Commissioner’s estranged wife, was filed with the Supreme Court earlier this year.

A copy of the document was e-mailed to police officers last week.

The legislation quoted in the warrant was thought to include Section 36 of the Police Act 1974 - related to “causing disaffection” in the ranks.

The Act rules: “Any person who causes or attempts to cause, or does any act calculated to cause, disaffection amongst members of the service, or induces or attempts to induce any member of the service, or does any act calculated to induce any member of the service, to withhold his services or to commit breaches of discipline commits an offence … ”

A summary conviction for the crime can result in a $500 fine, a year’s imprisonment or both.

Conviction on indictment can lead to a $5,000 fine, five years in jail or both.

Katie Richards, Mr Corbishley’s lawyer, told the Gazette in a letter last week: “There is an ongoing investigation being conducted by the Bermuda Police Service in order to identify the individual who disclosed and circulated the affidavit.”

On occasion The Royal Gazette may decide to not allow comments on what we consider to be a controversial or contentious story. 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.