I WISH to comment on two editorial pieces in two of the dailies, first the editorial note to my letter published in the Kaieteur News Friday April 13, 2012. In this note, the editor’s reference to the investigator’s perception of the young woman’s character is quiet unfortunate, since it gives the impression that if someone is a repeat offender, has a limited capacity to present a coherent story or have a questionable past, they have forfeited their right to seek justice, under the law, when there are violated. Then if that’s the intention of the law then many in our society will lose the right of recourse to our judicial system.
The other note I would like to comment on, is the editorial of the Guyana Chronicle of Saturday April 14, 2012,in which the editor made a valiant attempt to draw a comparison between the allegations levelled against the Commissioner of Police and those that were levelled against political leader and popular television producer, Mr. Sharma.
The editor’s comparison is like comparing cheese to chalk,since  the two allegations are serious crimes that should not be tolerated at any level within a civil society and they should be condemned vehemently.
He also attempted to draw a comparison with the approach or public position taken by the opposition political parties and leadership when the allegations became public.
In the case of CN Sharma, charges were made and the justice system was allowed to take its course, so both parties were and will be given a chance to prove their cases while no attempts were made to vilify the traumatised victim a second time. However in the case of the Commissioner of Police, the justice system was halted even before it started and the public disclosure of aspects of the young woman’s traumatic encounter just added insult to injury.