JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, July 11, 2025

Judge awards man $58,000 for licks in prison on birthday

by

730 days ago
20230711
Frank Seepersad

Frank Seepersad

Se­nior Re­porter

derek.achong@guardian.co.tt

A man liv­ing in east Port-of-Spain, who was beat­en by prison of­fi­cers on the eve of his 28th birth­day while serv­ing a sen­tence at the Port-of-Spain State Prison, has been award­ed $58,000 in com­pen­sa­tion. 

High Court Judge Frank Seep­er­sad or­dered the com­pen­sa­tion for Joel Roberts, of Clifton Hill, East Dry Riv­er, when he up­held his as­sault and bat­tery case af­ter pre­sid­ing over a brief tri­al, on Tues­day morn­ing. 

Ac­cord­ing to the ev­i­dence in the case, the law­suit stemmed from a se­ries of in­ci­dents which be­gan on De­cem­ber 9, 2020. 

Roberts was con­fined to a cell with sev­er­al oth­er in­mates when one of them threw the con­tents of the cell’s slop pail on the in­mates in the cell be­low them. 

Two prison of­fi­cers came to the cell and ac­cused Roberts of be­ing the cul­prit. 

Roberts claimed the of­fi­cers beat him on his hands and legs with their ba­tons af­ter he de­nied any wrong­do­ing. 

Al­though the in­mate that threw the pail ad­mit­ted to his ac­tions up­on see­ing Roberts be­ing beat­en, the two of­fi­cers still took Roberts to a se­nior of­fi­cer. 

Roberts claimed that the se­nior of­fi­cer re­moved the strap from a pail and used it to strike him 15 times on his back. Dur­ing the beat­ing, Roberts al­leged­ly con­fessed to throw­ing the con­tents of the pail. 

Roberts was tak­en to the prison’s in­fir­mary for treat­ment and was giv­en two painkillers. 

He claimed that he com­plained of still ex­pe­ri­enc­ing ex­cru­ci­at­ing pain and was again beat­en by a prison of­fi­cer. 

He stat­ed that he was on­ly tak­en to the Port-of-Spain Gen­er­al Hos­pi­tal for treat­ment over a week lat­er af­ter his lawyers filed a sep­a­rate law­suit that was up­held by High Court judge Bet­sy Ann Lam­bert-Pe­ter­son. 

Roberts was sub­se­quent­ly re­leased af­ter com­plet­ing his sen­tence but was forced to re­turn as he was con­vict­ed and sen­tenced for a dif­fer­ent crime he was ac­cused of. 

In up­hold­ing Roberts’ case, Jus­tice Seep­er­sad ruled that he (Roberts) had proved his claims on a bal­ance of prob­a­bil­i­ties. 

Jus­tice Seep­er­sad not­ed that Roberts pro­vid­ed pho­tographs tak­en by his lawyers days af­ter the in­ci­dents which showed welt marks on his back. 

Jus­tice Seep­er­sad or­dered $40,000 in gen­er­al dam­ages for the in­juries Roberts sus­tained. 

He al­so or­dered an ad­di­tion­al $18,000 in ex­em­plary dam­ages to sig­ni­fy his con­dem­na­tion of Roberts be­ing re­fused med­ical treat­ment. 

“Every re­quest for med­ical treat­ment must be fa­cil­i­tat­ed pro­vid­ed that ad­e­quate se­cu­ri­ty arrange­ments can be ef­fect­ed,” he said. 

“The re­fusal to fa­cil­i­tate med­ical treat­ment un­der­mines a cit­i­zen’s fun­da­men­tal rights and has no place in a civilised so­ci­ety,” he added. 

The judge al­so not­ed that the case demon­strat­ed the need for train­ing and sup­port for prison of­fi­cers, who work in volatile con­di­tions. 

“They must be af­ford­ed con­tin­u­ous train­ing and psy­cho­log­i­cal sup­port to en­able them to re­spond ad­e­quate­ly to sit­u­a­tions that un­fold and they need the req­ui­site pro­fes­sion­al as­sis­tance and train­ing to en­sure that their re­spons­es are mea­sured and pro­por­tion­ate,” Jus­tice Seep­er­sad said. 

Jus­tice Seep­er­sad al­so took is­sue with the fact that Nicholas Lalchan, one of the prison of­fi­cers ac­cused of beat­ing Roberts, de­clined to tes­ti­fy in the case af­ter re­sign­ing from the T&T Prison Ser­vice. 

“The of­fi­cer had a re­spon­si­bil­i­ty to be here. This re­spon­si­bil­i­ty is a re­sult of his for­mer em­ploy­ment. He al­so has a civic re­spon­si­bil­i­ty to give ev­i­dence where he has ma­te­r­i­al knowl­edge,” Jus­tice Seep­er­sad said. 

He sug­gest­ed that reg­u­la­tions be amend­ed to com­pel such of­fi­cers to com­ply. 

“The time has come to re­vis­it the op­er­a­tive reg­u­la­tions so as to im­pose a pos­i­tive oblig­a­tion/man­date up­on for­mer of­fice hold­ers to pro­vide ev­i­dence rel­a­tive to mat­ters which un­fold­ed dur­ing their em­ploy­ment even af­ter re­tire­ment or res­ig­na­tion,” he said. 

“The re­ceipt of con­tin­ued pen­sion­able ben­e­fits must be hinged to the con­tin­ued oblig­a­tion to be held to ac­count for the ac­tions which were un­der­tak­en dur­ing the course of one’s em­ploy­ment,” he added. 

Roberts was rep­re­sent­ed by Lemuel Mur­phy and Keishel Grant.  


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored