Cases of gov’t officials involved in sex scandals are tried and determined in the more cruel court of public opinion

Dear Editor,

The Vice President has pronounced that it is the court that will determine the fate of the alleged child predator (and by extension, the honour and credibility of the ruling party). This is a reckless position to take, bordering on both ignorance and arrogance. First of all, from my experience with litigious issues surrounding child welfare and domestic violence, verdicts and determinations are made on the basis of “preponderance” of evidence or other equivalent measures that imply that the defendant more likely than not committed the act, rather than “Beyond a reasonable doubt” is a more difficult standard to define, but it clearly requires a much higher level of certainty than does preponderance of the evidence.

From my personal experience and hundreds of court appearances in New York Family Court in CW and DV cases, I know that circumstantial evidence carries a lot of weight. Unfortunately in this case, and in favour of the defendant, trial will be held in a regular criminal court and prosecution will have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. This, in addition to the general high probability of acquittal in rape cases, not to mention the dramatics of the defendant’s attorney, one can likely predict the outcome of this case.

But more importantly, because of their arrogance, they fail to realize that sensitive political cases, especially cases of government officials involved in sex scandals (and worse, statutory rape) are tried and determined in the more cruel court of public opinion. Yes, it was not any court that brought down the UK Harold Macmillan government in the early sixties, it was the court of public opinion. In addition, child endangerment, child trafficking, sexual predation are sore issues at international levels. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (to which I believe Guyana is a signatory) is an important agreement by countries who have promised to protect children’s rights.

The international community that once supported the PPP will not be happy in the least, and will likely condemn the PPP’s behaviour for which I can bet they will surely suffer and terribly regret much sooner than later. It was their arrogance that cost them in 2015. But they did not learn the lesson.

Sincerely,

Gokarran Sukhdeo