Traffic cop freed of bribery charge

Constable Odane Davidson, the traffic officer accused of soliciting and accepting a $10,000 bribe from a motorist, was, on Wednesday, acquitted of corruption charges in the Portmore Night Court after a parish judge ruled that there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the charges.

Parish Judge Janelle Nelson-Gayle upheld a no-case submission from defence attorneys John Jacobs and D’Ondre Buchanan, who argued that the prosecution had failed to make out a prima facie case.

Davidson, who is assigned to the St Catherine North Traffic Department and resides in Clarendon, had been charged with two counts under the Corruption Prevention Act – corruptly soliciting and corruptly accepting money.

The charges stemmed from an incident on Saturday, October 21, 2023, during which the complainant alleged that he was stopped along the Spanish Town Bypass by a police officer for breaching the Road Traffic Act. He claimed that Davidson later approached him and requested $10,000 in exchange for not being prosecuted.

The incident was reportedly captured during a covert operation conducted by members of the Inspectorate and Professional Standards Oversight Bureau (IPROB), with at least one officer wearing a body camera.

However, during the trial, Davidson consistently denied the allegations and maintained his innocence.

In their submission, the defence argued that the complainant’s identification of Davidson was unreliable, stating that the complainant only saw the officer’s face for two seconds and that the individual he claimed took the money was wearing a helmet and dark glasses. Davidson, they pointed out, was not wearing glasses on the day in question.

“The complainant was adamant that the person who he gave the money was an officer wearing glasses. Under cross-examination, the complainant confirmed/accepted that the officer who he gave the money is the same officer who asked him what he can do for himself.

“This was the same police officer who was wearing the glasses, and based on the video recording, this could not be Davidson as he was not wearing any glasses,” defence lawyers submitted.

Further undermining the prosecution’s case, the defence highlighted that the video footage presented failed to capture any exchange of money between the complainant and the accused. There was no formal identification parade, no fingerprint or DNA evidence linking Davidson to the money, and no confirmation that the object seen in the officer’s hand was, in fact, cash.

Conflicting testimonies

Additionally, the defence lawyers argued that under cross-examination, the IPROB officers gave conflicting testimonies, with one officer admitting that he could not definitively say what was handed over and that the body camera footage did not clearly show the alleged exchange.

They maintained that the prosecution failed to provide direct evidence linking Davidson to the crime and that the allegations were based on “assumptions and speculation”.

“Based on the glaring contradictions/inconsistencies, vagueness and inherent weaknesses, lack of corroboration, or any other supporting evidence, any conviction would be unsafe and may lead to a grave miscarriage of justice,” they said.

In handing down his ruling, Gayle agreed with the defence that the inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case, lack of corroborating evidence, and failure to positively identify Davidson as the officer who solicited or accepted the bribe were fatal to their case.

Consequently, a formal plea of not guilty on both counts was handed down by the judge against Davidson.

tanesha.mundle@gleanerjm.com