The Royal Cayman Islands Police Service’s internal disciplinary procedures came under intense scrutiny by a Grand Court judge who delivered mixed verdicts against a senior police officer who was sued for assault by a colleague.
The “drawn-out” seven-year civil court battle came to an end on 28 Feb., when Justice Richard Williams ruled that Chief Inspector Frank Owens assaulted Police Constable Cardiff Robinson.
The civil case centred around two alleged assaults, the first of which occurred nearly nine years ago, on 1 June 2011, when Owens threw an outdated police-car logbook at Robinson, hitting him in the face and the chest, and shouted at him to get it updated.
“I am satisfied that [Owens] did not hand [Robinson] the logbook, but from close proximity, from about an arm’s lengths away, he threw the logbook at [Robinson], whilst at the same time telling him to complete the logbook properly,” wrote Williams in his judgment.
Owens was cleared in the second incident, which allegedly occurred on 13 Feb. 2012, when Owens confronted Robinson about his whereabouts, while he was supposed to be on a high-visibility patrol. Robinson alleged that during the confrontation, Owens came close to his face and began shouting and, while shouting, caused spittle to touch his face – which Robinson claimed amounted to assault.
“I do not accept [Robinson’s] evidence that [Owens] spat at him,” wrote Justice Williams when dismissing the second claim.
During the proceedings, Owens neither denied nor accepted either assault, instead saying he did not remember the incidents. He said the allegations had only been drawn to his attention when he was served with a notice of investigation by the Police Standards Unit, nearly two years after the incidents.
Robinson took the matter to the civil court in 2013 after the then Director of Public Prosecutions, Cheryll Richards, declined to formally lay a criminal charge against Owens “because it was not in the public’s interest”.
“It is a great pity that [Robinson] felt that he had no option but to initiate these drawn-out civil proceedings for there to be a proper investigation of his allegations,” Williams wrote.
In July 2012, the Department of Public Prosecutions provided then Commissioner of Police, David Baines, with its views about the merit of an internal investigation.
“Upon receipt of that advice, the police disciplinary body should have been directed to conduct and conclude a thorough and prompt internal investigation, something which would have been in the interest of all the parties in these proceedings,” wrote Williams. “Regrettably, this was not done, and on 10 April 2013, a frustrated [Robinson] felt compelled to issue a Writ and Statement of Claim.”
The judge said it was “disconcerting” that Robinson filed his defence 12 months after the DPP provided its view on the claims and, during that time, disciplinary proceedings were laid against Owens, but then adjourned pending the outcome of the civil claim.
“Those disciplinary charges and disciplinary proceedings should have been concluded well before the Writ of Summons was issued on 10 April 2013,” wrote Williams.
In his judgment, Williams stated that the assault involving the logbook was the type of incident that “would have been more effectively remedied by prompt management input from the RCIPS’s Human Resource Unit to address the nature of the fractured working relationship between [Robinson] and [Owens] rather than it being disproportionally elevated to grounding an application for civil financial redress in the Grand Court.”
“This was a technical assault of a very minor nature, right at the lower end of the scale of seriousness,” wrote Williams. “It is not uncommon for there to be such disputes in the workplace, especially one where the specific workplace involves discipline being enforced by senior ranks. This is no doubt why the then [Director of Public Prosecutions] felt, and I concur with her, that this matter would have been more effectively dealt with using the established internal investigation and disciplinary procedures within the Police.”
Despite the judge ruling that Owens was guilty of throwing the logbook, and thus assaulting Robinson, Owens will not be convicted of an offence of assault. This is because the matter was brought in the civil court, and not through the criminal court.
Robinson’s original writ also named the police commissioner. It claimed that Baines failed to properly investigate Robinson’s complaints, which he also alleged resulted in a breach of the Cayman Islands Constitution Order 2009. This claim was abandoned. The writ also claimed harassment and victimisation; however, those claims failed because there is no statutory tort of harassment in Cayman.
Neither party applied for costs, and Williams said in his “preliminary view … no order for costs should be made”. He added that if either party wished to file for costs they must do so by 6 March, which is 14 days after the judgment was delivered.
On Wednesday, current RCIPS Commissioner Derek Byrne said in a statement that after reading Justice Williams’ judgment he has taken note of the inadequacies within the police’s HR structures and policies.
“There is a lot of learning for the RCIPS contained in this judgment, the most pressing of which is the requirement to have in place robust Corporate Governance and Human Resources structures, policies, processes and procedures to deal with workplace related disputes and complaints,” said Commissioner Byrne. “In this regard, work is in progress to update and modernize HR structures, policies, processes and procedures in the RCIPS workplace environment to provide an effective internal conflict management/complaints resolution process to assist personnel in dealing with matters of concern to them.”
Byrne said no additional internal investigations will be conducted into the actions of Chief Inspector Owens following the “comprehensive examination and review of the circumstances and the findings of the honourable Judge in the case”.
“The focus now is to ensure that the RCIPS work environment is supported by appropriate structures and policies to assist our personnel in dealing with conflicts and internal complaints in the workplace environment,” he added.
Related Videos
