Inspector E. C. Gibbons
I trust this letter makes it in one piece, I shall have the previous document chase it down the line in the hope that ‘page one’ from 22.09.96 will arrive. I have little faith in the postal system, despite your letters arriving. My new address is as above and correspondence finds me directly.
My ‘success’ is in its early days. I do not claim it is entirely of my making but have sufficient input to take satisfaction from the current position. I believe my employees will this year receive a substantial bonus and I take pleasure in this. The company is expanding and I am busy recruiting.
As for respite, such intervals are brief.
I acknowledge and accept your comments with regard to the former establishment, but I think you have misunderstood my attitude. I place much humour in my ‘attacks’, I make my comments because I can. I have no fear of reprisal because I can support my accusations. I do not believe the people who ‘subverted and betrayed’ (your words, not mine) are gone. Nor do I have any intention of forgiving and forgetting, not yet anyway.
The humour is mocking of the force. Having stabbed me in the back I was permitted continual access to the Narcotics Department. No one else could co-ordinate the Miranda exhibits, I was required to make statements and the DI had the audacity to telephone me when the operation with Dillas occurred late one evening.
The DI should have been the subject of a disciplinary, George (Jackson) had the opportunity to make a difference. It was he who advised that I was not to keep Ramsey advised of developments re Miranda. In effect I was advised to be insubordinate. The same man then led me to the Commissioner’s office only days later to be confronted with ‘my attitude’. A few days after this, having been advised by then Commissioner of my return to uniform, to have no dealings with the Narcotics Department, in the presence of the DI, he asked to assist with Dillas. Make of it all what you will.
George should have said something, furthermore he should have kept me away from the Narcotics Department. While I have plenty to despise him for, his foolishness was advantageous.
I do not have a sense of grievance, I have a sense of ‘right’. I wonder if you re-read your letters? How is it that you can accept and relate that I was the subject of subversion and betrayal, advising that my sense of grievance is not without merit, yet no one else appears to? Do not misunderstand my words; ‘Loathing and anger’, yes. I should have stressed that both are controlled, as mentioned previously, I could reek havoc. My feelings are only natural, I have little sense of time and will not forget. I do not believe life is so simple, the passing of a few days, months or years changes nothing. Life is not that simple, neither am I.
Why is it that you now find the time to place your concerns to paper. Presumably you have been banging on the Commissioner’s door advising him of the injustice? Your letter only tells me that which I know, you are informing the wrong person.
Do you not find this peculiar? You bear testament (now) to my being screwed by the job, your job. The remarks are almost throw away. I am not being afforded the opportunity to turn the other cheek, I am expected to cauterise a portion of memory. I have no intention of doing so, I will benefit by the experience. To this end I will not let Bermuda poison my mind.
I suspect there are many who would relish the opportunity to have been in the position I found myself, after much hard work. For many, to achieve a substantial, privileged position, from which to fall (be knocked off) exists in imagination only. I am not suggesting they would wish to suffer adverse consequences, but very few accomplish that which I am able to recount. I appreciate this and therefore will never let the events destroy me. Instead I experience a passion on each occasion I relive the memories. My drive is not derived from history, it is fuelled by the present.
How many complaints revolve about one person’s word against that of another? Most, the Courts are full of them. I am proud that I will not fall into this category. I would not partake of a fight where it would be my word against another, I do not need the argument. I also believe that, in such a situation, if I did not foresee the event ,or consider it, I only have myself to blame. I am fortunate, I have the ability to demonstrate my case and with this knowledge I am at ease.
I have, on a number of occasions, attempted to have the Governors Office consider my ‘appeal’. My words have fallen on deaf ears. My original complaint was ignored. Ramsey was protected.
I would not have stayed in Bermuda beyond a further 3 years, but was not afforded this facility. I was forced out and did not dare to approach a UK police service for fear of an adverse report. My certificate of service read ‘satisfactory’, after all I did. For months upon my return I lived off of savings and accepted paltry wages while settling. In May of 1991 I took a full time job being paid considerably less than I would have received in the police service. I could go on.
In giving the Bermuda service the opportunity to resolve the matter I acted honourably. Bermuda denied me a hearing and offered no alternatives so I washed my hands of the Island. I also considered those who had watched me fall.
Coggie, how is it you can so easily make reference to my being subverted and betrayed, acknowledging there is merit in my grievance almost 6 years later? Is writing good for your soul?
I will not dwell on this aspect. Suffice it to say I feel the Bermuda service made a serious mistake. I have no knowledge of skinning cats though one hears there are many ways to perform the operation. I do know I have an awful lot of information which, if used correctly, could benefit me in numerous ways. There is much beyond financial gain I can assure you.
I am actively considering my options. Approaching the Bermuda authorities could be among them however, I do not trust the force and feel that my offer would be wrongly construed as blackmail. No doubt there are ways around this.
It is a shame the force did not entertain my legitimate claim for constructive dismissal as readily as yourself, a compensatory payment, I suspect, would be significantly less than the legal bills associated with preventing publication of potentially damaging information. I question how much it would cost to protect a witness/informant, or are they expendable? I do think Bermudans such as Dwight Hatherly should consider appealing against their conviction. Again, I could go on.
I have been screwed by Bermuda once, it will not happen a second time. You will note I use your words in support of my cause. Possibly you would care to advise Harold Moniz that you will make a good witness for my case. I am sorry Coggie but your words only offer support to my cause. You endorse my belief. I was proud to be called your friend, you are an exceptional person, I take great comfort in your acknowledging my having been the subject of unfair acts. You are a person of sound reasoning but can you not see you only spur me on.
Possibly this is a demonstration of my lateral thinking, maybe just a twisted perception. I do not think so. Where do I go from here? I will be pursuing my ‘compensation’. While I would have preferred this to have been from the ‘force’ with an apology, a confidentiality agreement built in, possibly with a return of all correspondence, I do not envisage this being a consideration by Bermuda.
The leaflet you enclosed will be read but, I am sure that I will interpret the words differently to yourself. I sincerely believe that I am right, it follows therefore that no harm can come to me.
I will post this letter. I owe you that.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Bermuda.org.uk has taken reasonable care in sourcing and presenting the information contained on this site, but accepts no responsibility for any financial or other loss or damage that may result from its use. Bermuda.org.uk is not an official or authorised Bermuda police web site.