Home
Up

32 Highwood Lane,
Paget
PG 05
15th October, 1996

Dear Phil,

You’re getting warmer by faxing your correspondence to C.R.O. My fax number is (441) 299-4272. I’d intended to mention it earlier.

It was good to hear from you again. You’re quite prompt in your replies. For that I shan’t criticise your punctuation errors!

I don’t think I’ve at all misunderstood your attitude towards the former establishment. You said that you “place much humour in [your] ‘attacks’.” I’d say that you “place much ‘humour’ in your attacks” Phil, you don’t disguise your venom even subtly, and I’m not enough of a fool to think your attitude otherwise. I was a witness, remember?

Let me encapsulate my position so that I leave you in no doubt of what I think, and where you stand on this in my view - to the extent that it matters. I was proud, too, to be called your friend. I have good memories of our work together and shall always value them. I shall also always be happy to hear from you and see you again. I stand by my assertion that you were subverted and betrayed (my words) - BUT

It is not my place to “[bang] on the Commissioner’s door advising him of the injustice”. I am your friend, and I am a witness to much of what happened to you. I am not your advocate, nor should you expect me to be. Be your own, and call your witnesses. I should appear (subjunctive mood, not speculative statement). But remember this: that some of what I am aware that you did was unethical, even illegal. I am equally aware that I sanctioned and even supported it in hubristic furtherance of what I thought a proper cause (not course). I am now deeply sorry for that. That was my failing.

How is it that I “now find time to place [my] concerns on paper?” It is that I’ve sufficiently recovered a sense of balance, and sufficiently overcome the sense of outrage which you precipitated when you exposed others of your former colleagues and me to risk as ‘collateral damage’ in your efforts to embarrass the former

Page 2  

establishment. I found that appalling. You’re a man of great intelligence and method. You could have aimed much closer to your mark, and I suspect that you realise that. We weren’t the ones who subverted you, but I was one who tacitly distanced himself from you because of your inconsideration of the consequences of your actions on those who’d previously stood by you. However, I don’t bear grievances long, especially against friends. Grievances are burdensome and poisonous, and friends are valuable. This is not condescension, it’s conciliation. Make of it what you will.

Is writing good for my soul? Yes, in the sense of discharging a burden; not in the sense of a need of expiation in this context - I do not feel that I am required to expiate anything in my reactions to what you did.

As to your grievance, only you can choose to retain or reject it. Only you can decide whether to accept the risk that it poisons you while not being palliated, not being alleviated except in bilious writings. I sincerely pray for you, Phil. You’re too fine a person to be destroyed - and you will be to some extent, unless you find moral justice, or abandon the issue. I wish you well should you continue to try the former; I understand the difficulty and tribulation should you attempt the latter. In either you have my support as a friend.

I am thankful that in Jesus Christ we have a Saviour who freely pardons our sins when we truly repent of them. I have every faith that He has pardoned mine. I want by the leaflet and my few, inarticulate words, to introduce you to Him. I am happy that you will read the leaflet (your use of the passive voice ‘Will be read” could be interpreted otherwise) and I hope you’ll do so with an open mind.

Stay in touch and all the best!

Coggie 

Comment:

interesting that a senior officer believes actions to have been unethical or illegal.  If that was an honestly held belief (even if only to Inspector Coggie Gibbons' perception) then I am surprised the facts were not reported by him - or that he raised an objection at the time.  However, nothing was said and therefore, based on the Officer's perception alone, it is evident he believes he permitted unethical and illegal behavior to occur.  Strange - no one ever mentioned such behavior when I served in Bermuda, the excuse to oust me was 'bucked authority' and 'attempted to tape record a senior officer'.  It is hardly surprising that the Bermuda police do not want to interview Inspector Gibbons - he is likely to undermine the entire narcotics department and several officers serving in other departments.

And what of the comments relating to Inspector Gibbons sense of outrage when exposing others - my former colleagues.

Let's just get that in perspective.  I reported some impropriety AFTER I had been forced to leave the island.  AFTER my 'colleagues' had failed to provide support and allowed the service to dismiss me in contravention of the discipline code.  When I made my allegations I was not specific; I named no colleague in my report, which appears on these pages at COMPLAINT.

I had no reason to name colleagues, my complaint was about my dismissal, orchestrated by senior officers.  I am willing to give Inspector Gibbons the benefit of the doubt; I suspect he was misinformed by those who 'investigated' my complaint.  Furthermore, I suspect many officers were misinformed about my complaint and given to believe it related to them.  Nothing could be further from the truth and I believe this web site will support this - I have not held back documents (such as the letter above) even where they make adverse comments about me.

After my complaint came to nothing - I received no support from my so called colleagues (to include Inspector Gibbons who clearly failed to tell anyone just how I was subverted and betrayed) - I came to learn that I had effectively been blamed for every failing of the Narcotics Department.  I learned that statements had been recorded from officers in the Narcotics department and none supported my allegations - they had lied.  They had falsified accounts to protect themselves and undermine my position.

At that time I made allegations - one being that officers had used blank, signed, search warrants.  Again, I mentioned no names.  

The only person who has a reason to feel outrage is myself - the person subverted and betrayed by the 'establishment' and his former colleagues.

Evidently Coggie Gibbons, a serving police officer, does not feel it is his place to bang on the Commissioner's door advising him of the injustice.  I am very surprised.  On the one hand here is a man who wishes to cleanse his conscience but is only prepared to go part way.  He has the evidence, to use his word, of INJUSTICE but appears willing to take it to the grave with him.  This is not the action of a friend, nor is it the behavior of someone who has any concern for his Constabulary or Country.  The Officer is prepared to let the lie continue.  

Why should a serving police officer not report an injustice about a 'friend' and expose subversion and betrayal within his own police service?

I do not know the answer.  I find his actions very disappointing.  Police Inspector Coggie Gibbons could bring an end to my frustrations but chooses not to do so.  Instead he works alongside those who would undermine colleagues and misrepresent facts.  It appears he is acting int he belief 'I drew first blood'.  Not the case.

Coggie, it is time to tell the truth.  Every day you delay is another day you live a lie.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx