Despite all the negatives that eventually came to detract from the bravado and cinematic escapades of Randolph Burroughs, one aspect of his Kojak-style policing was his willingness to lead his men from the front on raids they undertook – even when he became commissioner.

One eternal criticism of leaders who declare war and ask their soldiers to lay their life on the line is that they remain safe and secure in their castles and ivory towers, while the lesser mortals are sent out to face the firing squad; face their own final day of reckoning.

Some of the greatest leaders of all times – Alexander, Julius Caesar, Napoleon – were soldiers first then Emperors.

In the cricket analogy, when the captain doesn't score runs, takes wickets and catches, when he doesn't lead from in front, he is axed for being merely a non-playing captain.

Jack Warner is criticised for being present at the demolition of the re-routers camp site, and although that might have been an inauspicious baptism of fire he got himself in, from the perspective of proactive leadership, of a leader putting his money (life?) where his mouth is, isn't that a plus of sorts? It is a truism indeed that in public life if you do you are damned, if you don't do you are still damned.

If Jack's presence in police raids not only inspires his men to rise above themselves, but also serves to temper the possible abuse of police power, should we be invoking all kinds of constitutional niceties to damn it or should we as a people besieged by the criminals be thankful for small mercies?

It all makes me think of the cough medicine advertisement that boasts that it tastes awful....but it works; and as we know, the buck stops with Jack.

L Siddhartha Orie

Via e-mail