The Editor, Sir:

Perhaps I am in error, thinking that 119 Police Control is supposed to perform similarly to the 911 of the United States, where emergency calls are received by police dispatchers who take information and direct officers to the scene of a crime, accident or emergency in a timely manner.

If this is not the case, and I am in error, then I eagerly await someone from the JCF to enlighten us. I am not the only person who holds this assumption, nor sees it as an unreliable expectation of people who are committed to 'Serve, Protect and Reassure'.

On Friday, August 8, with no credit on my cellphone, I hurriedly called 119 at 1:28 p.m. as a man was verbally and physically threatening my 63-year-old 'godmother' and myself, brandishing a piece of board and salivating expletives. Not only did he threaten to burn down a property she controls, but said if he saw my "white germs" in his "black land", he would "chop and drink my blood".

The 13th ring

The phone rang and rang. He got even more agitated. Finally, on the 13th ring, someone answered and I explained the situation, saying we needed an officer to come from the station immediately. She said "hold on" and the phone began ringing. After the 20th ring, I hung up the phone to defend my 'godmother' from the man who was becoming increasingly abusive, throwing buckets of glass and debris into the yard.

The situation calmed down, and after discussing things with community members, I decided calling the police to intervene was the correct and proper course of action. At 2:23 p.m., I called 119 police control again and this time spoke with an older male officer

. He seemed distressed that I had called earlier to no avail, and assured me that "officers would be there shortly". Now, I am not a trained member of the JCF, but it doesn't make sense for ME to have to ASK HIM to take down my name and phone number and take the name of the alleged assailant. Shouldn't this be standard protocol?

Dear Editor, the police station is only five blocks away, at the most. There is NO valid reason for the following call log to be as it is:

1:28 p.m. - Unsuccessful

2:28 p.m. - officers will "be there shortly"

2:46 p.m. - officers are "on their way"

3:07 p.m. - the answering officer HUNG UP ON ME

3:08 p.m. - officers are "on their way"

3:19 p.m. - the answering officer "just got on shift" and "was not aware of any prior calls"

3:31 p.m. - officer put me on hold and then HUNG UP ON ME

3:34 p.m. - officer put me on hold ....

3:35 p.m. - Two officers arrived, saying they "just received the call".

Professionalism

Dear Editor, these two officers came and talked with the alleged man who after two hours was still in the yard. I was impressed with their professionalism, and we have received no further harassment from this individual. The question that I ask, which I posed to the officer I called at 3:19 p.m., is this: Are officers waiting to come to the scene of an emergency as a house is burning down, or there is a bleeding body on the street?

Please, Editor, have the JCF describe to us what the standard protocol is for answering 119 calls. Although I am grateful no credit was taken off of my phone for these numerous calls, perhaps the officers are misinformed that hanging up the phone is a proper course of action.

With the murder rate rising daily, I feel like I have discovered a piece of the jigsaw puzzle that had been laying under a piece of carpet unawares. If we could lift it further, perhaps we can discover how 500 trucks and an aeroplane galley drug stash have disappeared as well.

I am, etc.,

SERVED, PROTECTED and REASSURED?

Kingston 6