Report No. 368 (2020) IACHR. Petition No. 1081- 14 (Jamaica)

• Year: 2020
• Case Type: Admissibility
• Respondent State: Jamaica
• Court: Inter-American Comission of Human Rights

REPORT No. 368/20

PETITION 1081- 14

REPORT ON ADMISSIBILITY

KEMAR WALTERS AND FAMILY

JAMAICA

OEA/Ser.L/V/II.

D.. 386

12 December 2020

Original: English

Approved electronically by the Commission on December 12, 2020.

Cite as: IACHR, Report No. 368/20, Petition 1081-14. A.. K.W. and family. Jamaica. December 12, 2020.

www.iachr.org

I. INFORMATION ABOUT THE PETITION

Petitioners:	International Human R.s Clinic of the L.L.S. and Jamaicans for Justice
:	Kemar Walters and family
Respondent S.:	Jamaica1
R.s invoked:	Articles 3 (R. to Juridical Personality), 4 (R. to Life), 5(R. to Humane Treatment), 7 (R. to Personal Liberty), 8 (R. to a Fair Trial), and Article 25 (R. to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention on Human R.s2 in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof

II. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IACHR3

Filing of the petition:	J. 29, 2014
Additional information received at the stage of initial review:	A. 15, 2019
N. of the petition to the S.:	J. 5, 2019
S.’s first response:	Dec 17, 2019
Additional observations from the petitioner:	May 5, 2020, November 20, 2020
Additional observations from the S.:	Aug 5, 2020

III. COMPETENCE

Competence Ratione personae:	Yes
Competence Ratione loci:	Yes
Competence Ratione temporis:	Yes
Competence Ratione materiae:	Yes, American Convention (deposit of instrument of ratification made on August 7, 1978)

IV. DUPLICATION OF PROCEDURES AND INTERNATIONAL RES JUDICATA, COLORABLE CLAIM, EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES AND TIMELINESS OF THE PETITION

Duplication of procedures and International res judicata:	No
R.s declared admissible	Articles 3 (R. to Juridical Personality), 4 (R. to Life), 5(R. to Humane Treatment), 7 (R. to Personal Liberty), 8 (R. to a Fair Trial), and Article 25 (R. to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof
E. of domestic remedies or applicability of an exception to the rule:	Yes; under the terms of section VI
Timeliness of the petition:	Yes; under the terms of section VI

V. ALLEGED FACTS

1. The petitioners claim that K.W. (“the alleged victim”) was, in December 2004, the subject of forced disappearance and presumed extrajudicial killing at the hands of officers of the Jamaica Constabulary Force. The petitioners further allege that to date, the S. has failed to diligently investigate, prosecute, and punish this crime; and that this crime falls within a well-documented pattern of hundreds of fatal shootings carried out by security forces each year, which the S. rarely, if ever, adequately investigates or punishes. The petitioners indicate that description of the events leading to the disappearance of the alleged victim are reconstructed from several press accounts.4

2. According to the petitioners, the alleged victim was a 20 year-old man who worked as a mechanic apprentice at his father's auto body repair garage in the Washington Boulevard area of the parish of St. A.. On December 23, 2004, the petitioners claim that the alleged victim went to work at his father's auto body repair garage. The petitioners further allege that (a) O.D. (who had been a customer for the past year), came to the garage driving a blue Honda CRV, which had been reported stolen from Montego Bay on November 20, 2004; and (b) O.D. gave K.W. a ride in the blue Honda CRV to purchase automobile parts at a hardware store in Washington Plaza,(a shopping mall) located on Washington Blvd in St. A..

3. W. at the mall, the petitioners allege that at around 1 pm, a group of police officers, namely, Officers H., Edwards and L. of the Organized Crime Investigation Division (“OCID”), approached the alleged victim and O.D.. These officers were in an unmarked red Honda Civic driven by O.E.. According to the petition, the police vehicle stopped alongside the Honda CRV and the officers emerged to approach with guns in hand. The police officers inspected the Honda CRV and questioned both the alleged victim and O.D.. O.D. claimed that the vehicle was his, but unsatisfied with this answer, the police handcuffed the alleged victim and O.D. and placed them in the back of the unmarked red Honda Civic. According to the petitioners, these officers were all part of an ongoing investigation into an island-wide car-stealing ring. H., the petitioners state that there were allegations that some of these officers were in fact complicit in the operation, accepting bribes to look the other way or participating in actual car stealing operations. O.D. was alleged to be a major participant in that ring, as was the father of the alleged victim.

4. According to the petitioners, O.H. indicated that alleged victim and O.D. should be taken to OCID headquarters, but Officer Edwards wanted to question them further about other stolen cars and called Officers L. and S., who arrived at the scene in an unmarked white Toyota Corolla. Officers Edwards, L. and S. departed with the alleged victim and O.D. in the white Toyota Corolla, while O.H. departed in the Honda CRV, and O.L. in the Honda Civic. According to the petitioners, this was the last time that the alleged victim was seen alive.

5. The petitioners provide a chronology of events subsequent to the arrest of the alleged victim and O.D., which are set out in the following paragraphs.

6. The alleged victim was first taken to a police station in the parish of St. C. where he was beaten repeatedly and allegedly held for “ransom” in relation to the auto theft ring. The relative contacted for the ransom could hear K.W. being beaten in the background, "while begging for mercy." At the same time, O.D. was shot in the leg. The alleged victim was later taken to the swamplands of the Jam World Entertainment Complex in the parish of St. C. where he was shot and killed. It is alleged that his body was buried somewhere in Constitution Hill, in the parish of St. A.. M., Oliver D. was taken to Green Bay in the parish of St. C. where he was tortured while handcuffed to a rail until he revealed the location of stolen cars and money, and thereafter he was killed.

7. Officer H. made several unsuccessful attempts to contact O.E., following which he decided to call O.B., his superior, to express concern for the safety of D. and Walters. A. reassuring O.H., O.B. ordered O.H. to park the blue Honda CRV in a private location (which ultimately turned out to be in the area of the Port Royal Road, Kingston). S., O.H. received a call from O.E. instructing him to meet Officers Edwards, L., S., and L.a.H.V. (in Kingston), and thereafter all five officers went to an abandoned building near Port Royal Road (in Kingston). O.H. asked O.E. about Walters and D., who responded that both had been fatally shot. Officer Edwards indicated that he had shot O.D. while another (unnamed officer) had shot the alleged victim. O.E. said they needed gasoline to burn the Honda CRV. Ultimately, the five officers took the Honda CRV to a wooded area where Officers Edwards, L., and S. threw debris and gasoline onto the CRV and lit it on fire. On December 25, 2004, the burnt out shell of the Honda CRV was discovered and an investigation was initiated by forensic experts.

8. In the interim, C.A., the mother of the alleged victim, attempted to locate her son by visiting police stations several times and filing a missing persons’ report with the Internal Affairs Bureau of the JCF. Following the filing of the missing persons’ report, police officers attempted to find alleged victim and O.D. by going to various lock-ups and morgues, but did not find the missing men.

9. Efforts were then made to falsify or conceal evidence connecting the five officers to the disappearance of the alleged victim and Oliver D.. On January 10, 2005, in response to inquiries about the missing men made beginning in December 2004, O.B. dictated false statements for the involved officers to write, claiming that on the day the alleged victim and O.D. disappeared, the officers had been in Kingston apprehending a man who was driving a stolen Toyota Tundra. A station diary placed O.E. in downtown Kingston at the time of the detention of the alleged victim and D.. O.B. also took the SIM cards from the officers' cellphones, saying that investigators were conducting cell site analysis. O.B. said he would deal with witnesses for an identification parade and any other witness matters.

10. On January 6, 2005, the Criminal Investigations Bureau (CIB) took over the investigation of the disappearance of the alleged victim and O.D.. S., in the same month, the Police Commissioner requested the assistance of Scotland Yard in the investigation. On January 14, 2005, O.L. was identified in an identification parade and was taken into custody. He was charged with two counts of assault and two counts of false imprisonment. A. two weeks in custody, L. was released on $150,000 JD (about $2,300 USD in 2005) bail after appearing in the Corporate Area Criminal Court on January 23, 2005. Ultimately, O.L. went on trial in J. 2007, but was ultimately freed in August 2007 primarily because the prosecution was unable to locate two main witnesses (to link him to the crimes). Officer H. was also arrested in December 2004 but released after witnesses failed to identify him in an identification parade. S., two other officers later identified in 2009 as Officers L. and Edwards, were taken into custody on January 12, 2005, but were released after...