‘No Public Interest’ in Prosecuting TCI Premier Michael Misick for Assault, Theft, and Perverting Justice?

No man is above the law. People in democratic countries generally take comfort in that axiom. But Premier Michael Misick of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) is disabusing us of this comfort.

No public interest in prosecuting TCI Premier Michael Misick

Kurt de Freitas is the attorney general of the TCI. He has decided there’s no public interest in prosecuting Misick. This, despite credible allegations that Misick committed assault and theft. And that he perverted justice by attempting to cover up his crimes. But none of this should surprise any of us.

Misick is a wannabe gansta. Everything from his bling-bling lifestyle to his thuggish behavior shows this. The latter explains reports that he allegedly assaulted Opposition MP Hon. Arthur Robinson.

Misick claims Robinson and other opposition MPs were conspiring to kill him. But nobody has any reason to believe him. He has a notorious habit of telling lies – big and small.

TCI attorney general turns blind eye

But Misick is not the story here. De Freitas is. He’s supposed to be the country’s chief law enforcement official. But he’s acting more like Misick’s defense attorney.

Only that explains his reasoning for dismissing the charges at issue. Not to mention the mockery he’s making of the axiom that no man is above the law.

For starters, he asserted that the allegations are much ado about nothing. This, even though they pertain to assault, theft, and perverting justice. And that no less a person than a member of parliament is the person making those allegations.

A prosecution is…unwarranted on public interest ground s. …Neither of them, it appears, suffered any harm. …

A prosecution against the Premier…is likely to be blown grossly out of proportion to the alleged offense of common assault and, in addition, such a trial may undermine the justice system.

But consider what message his statement sends. After all, young men in the TCI are already committing too many assaults. And too many victims already see no point in reporting them.

Yet this attorney general is telling young men they won’t be prosecuted. This, so long as the assaults they commit do not cause any harm.

But he’s also telling victims don’t bother reporting them if unless they suffer grievous bodily harm. Any emotional trauma they might suffer be damned. It’s hard to imagine anything doing more to undermine law and order than this statement.

But wait, there’s more. Here’s the specious reasoning de Freitas offered to explain why the alleged theft is okay too:

The evidence discloses that at the time the camera was taken, there was no intention by Mills [the Premier’s bodyguard] to permanently deprive the owner thereof. A charge of theft of the camera would therefore not be justified in such circumstances.

Except that nobody thinks Misick wanted his bodyguard to steal the camera. The camera captured his alleged assault. And Misick wanted his bodyguard to erase that. And if this required temporarily depriving the owner, so be it. His intention in this regard is self-evident.

But consider the young man who gets caught stealing a car. And he claims he had “no intention…to permanently deprive the owner thereof.” A “charge of theft of the [car] would therefore not be justified.”

Which brings me full circle to his circular reasoning for not filing charges:

In the absence of any independent or corroborative evidence to assist in the determination of which version may be true, the Chambers did not think it fair, or appropriate to select one version over another as being in order to found a prosecution.

At long last, this quote explains all. Because it makes clear that de Freitas has no clue what his duties are. There is no logic to his reasoning. This, no matter how much you rummage through his statement.

But never mind acting like Misick’s defense attorney. Because he’s acting like prosecutor, judge, and jury too!

Even so, I feel obliged to observe the mercy rule. Because his statement is replete with legal fallacies. Not to mention its untenable public-policy implications.

Prosecuting Misick is a categorical imperative

The US prosecuted Bill Clinton. But it wasn’t for getting a blowjob. It was for committing perjury and obstructing justice.

Likewise, the TCI should have prosecuted Michael Misick. It might not have been for assaulting Robinson or stealing his camera. But it should have been for abusing his power and perverting the course of justice.

De Freitas dismissed this as a “common assault case.” That insults the intelligence of all TCIslanders. Because we all know that it was (and remains) all about this premier’s abuse of power.

De Freitas has now given Misick cause to think he’s above the law. But this only reflects the authoritarian nature of Misick’s premiership. His handling of this case has left TCIslanders with no confidence in the rule of law.

But the British government is responsible for ensuring good governance in our country. Lord Triesman is its head of Overseas Territories. Yet he’s praising Misick for wresting constitutional powers from the UK. That’s odd. But Triesman has yet to admonish Misick for abusing those powers in his dealings with us. That’s disheartening.

So I’ll end by appealing to Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Please intervene ASAP