Dear Editor,
I refer to the report headlined ‘ Carnal knowledge accused granted $200,000 bail – ordered not to go within 300 yards of VC’ (Stabroek News, Tuesday, December 4, 2007)
Magistrate Geeta Chandan should not give bail at all to a 30-year-old man accused of having carnal knowledge of a 13-year-old girl. This was reported at the same time as two 15-16 year olds were put on remand accused of stealing mobile phones. All should of course be presumed innocent, but it is obvious that the former offence is by far the more serious, and does carry possibilities of terrorising the alleged victim.
One cannot believe that the people who say they had their mobile phones stolen would feel terrorised if the accused in their cases were released on bail. One can imagine a possibility that the girl in the other case might feel some distress.
Being held on remand does not imply guilt, so the arguments of counsel to that effect should not have been taken notice of by Ms Chandan. She then went even further by lowering the original bail set because his family were said not to have sufficient money. This statement also was not proven.
It is clear to me what a woman who is spurned by a man she desires should therefore do: she should lend/give him her mobile phone, run to the police and accuse him of stealing it. She would then have the immense satisfaction of seeing him incarcerated immediately, with no necessity for a trial, and little chance of having her name impugned.
Yours faithfully,
Naomi Wallace
