As a sociologist, I am quite aware that in a couple days time the “Dana Mania” which we are engrossed will die a natural death, replaced by an equally bizarre distraction, as citizens trudge along in our newly redefined comfort zones; many of us preoccupied with our struggle to makes ends meet, i.e., pay bills and “eat ah food”. I too, share in the nation’s grief on the loss of one of the very few personalities who managed to transcend gender, ethnicity, religion and politics; an extremely rare species in this land.
The reward being offered will never be collected by anyone, as politicians merely do what they have been known to do all along: “grandstand.”
The state of this nation is what it is because of their inability to sit down, as big men and women do, and arrive at meaningful solutions to the myriad challenges facing us. These challenges didn’t manifest themselves in the assassination of one of our few daughters/sisters who made us proud.
The witness protection programme, in its current format, despite claims from some ex-captain, is a complete waste of time, as is the ex-captain himself. I was quite willing to remain silent on this one, that was, until he spoke—again.
He said it before I allowed him some wiggle room so as not to be seen as “coming down” on the Minister of National Security all the time. But I heard him repeat this drivel, and suddenly I cannot help getting upset. I have heard him say, on more than one occasion, that “there is no such thing as a perfect crime.” His statement is offensive for a number of reasons but it also flies in the face of the evidence falling out of police lockers and stations’ ceilings in the past couple years.
Perhaps Mr Griffith can take a minute and inform us illiterate, hard working, taxpayers of his concept of a “perfect crime.” To add insult to injury in Ms Seetahal’s assassination, this ex-captain turned guru was quoted as saying, “There would have been people who would have known what was happening.” How insightful! One wonders about his advisers.
If the issue at hand was not as serious as it is, his statements would make great comedy material. But the way Ms Seetahal’s life came to an abrupt end raises serious concerns.
Whosoever conjured up the idea of the reward, simply believes that by throwing $3.5 million at the problem snitches, like guns and drugs, would fall out from ceilings. This reflects their cluelessness in understanding the criminal culture.
The reward says for the arrests... and “conviction.” How long does the average murder trial take before the courts? Experience says it is between ten and 13 years.
As for his “no perfect crime” theory the captain may wish to identify who has been convicted for the dustbin bombs, one of which was responsible for an innocent citizen losing her leg.
He may also wish to elaborate on the helicopter used to deliver the then minister’s arrival at the crime scene, blowing away any shred of evidence. Or he may wish to explain the thousands of other murders which have taken place in the past 14 years or so, for which there has been no arrest.
The implications of a reward do nothing but further divide an already divided population. It says that different people’s lives have different values.
No reward has ever been offered for the many lives lost in “hot spots’’ over the years. Here the peasants compare the value of one life against another, without fully appreciating the symbolism.
Many of us have lost friends, neighbours and family members, all whose lives were deemed equally valuable. Or is the reward merely just another attempt to just throw money at our social problems hoping they would disappear, like “Colour me Orange”?
Rudy Chato Paul