A police officer investigating a claim that Lovell Marriott had indecently exposed herself during a one-women protest outside the Government Administration Building last year has told a court she couldn’t find any evidence to support the allegation.
Giving evidence in Summary Court via video link on Tuesday, 1 Aug., Constable Tameka Joseph-Ricketts told Magistrate Kirsty-Ann Gunn that on 5 Jan. 2022, she received a call from her supervisor who requested she investigate a report that Marriott had exposed her genitalia outside the government building during her protest.
“When you arrived at the building, did you see any videos of Ms. Marriott exposing her [genitalia]?” asked Marriott’s attorney, Amelia Fosuhene, to which Joseph-Ricketts replied, “No”.
Joseph-Ricketts, who was giving evidence on behalf of the prosecution, told the court that she viewed CCTV footage of outside and inside the building, but couldn’t see any evidence that showed Marriott exposing herself.
“I saw her dancing on the videos, but I couldn’t see where she had exposed her [genitalia],” said Joseph-Ricketts.
She added that when she arrived, she noticed Marriott was sitting calmly and that CCTV footage showed that, on the occasions when she entered the building, “she didn’t behave indecently”.
Joseph-Ricketts also told the court that she eventually called the 911 dispatch centre to verify the details of the report, but was told that there was no such report and she was never able to find any evidence of a report being made.
Although the initial allegation was that Marriott indecently exposed herself, she was not charged with that offence. Instead, Marriott was arrested the following day and later charged with a single count of being an idle and disorderly person.
Turning her attention to Marriott’s choice of clothing on the day of the protest, Fosuhene questioned whether the scantily clad nature of the clothing was enough reason to arrest her client.
“Have you ever seen people going along the streets wearing batty-riders [short shorts]?” asked the defence counsel, to which the officer replied, “Yes”.
She then asked, “Have you ever seen tourists around the town walking with nothing but their bikini bottoms on [not covered by shorts], and, on occasions, some are even dancing?”
“Yes”, replied the officer.
“Sometimes, while dancing, their bikini bottoms or knickers will result in a wedgie or up their butt cracks. Have you ever arrested anyone for this?” asked Fosuhene, to which the constable responded she hadn’t.
“And that’s because batty-riders and knickers up butt cracks are not reasons for arrest, wouldn’t you agree?” she asked.
“I agree they aren’t reasons to arrest someone,” replied Joseph-Ricketts.
Fosuhene then turned her attention to the lewd behaviour often demonstrated during Cayman’s seasonal carnivals, asking Joseph-Ricketts if she had ever arrested people for being scantily clad and gyrating in the presence of minors and often ‘grinding’ on complete strangers.
The officer replied she had not.
During re-examination by Crown counsel Shauna-Kaye James, Joseph-Ricketts told the court the reason why she never arrested people at events, such as street parades was because those were public events.
Marriott denies the allegation against her and remains on bail.
- An earlier version of the story carried a headline that incorrectly implied that Ms Marriott’s lawyer had stated that her protest was ‘lewd’.
Related Videos
She ‘told the court the reason why she never arrested people at events, such as street parades was because those were public events.’ Surely that’s even worse? Children are frequently present.