Goff v Flowers

• Jurisdiction: Belize
• Court: Supreme Court (Belize)
• Judge: Staine, C.J.
• Judgment Date: 21 July 1980
• Docket Number: Action No. 1 of 1980
• Date: 21 July 1980

Supreme Court

Staine, C.J.

Action No. 1 of 1980

Goff

and

Flowers

Tort - Arrest by police officer for uttering indecent words — The offence was a petty offence and not an arrestable one — Magistrate bound over police officer to keep the peace — However, as the police officer was not acting in a personal capacity, but on behalf of the sovereign, the magistrate had no power to bind her over to keep the peace.

Staine, C.J.

1 The facts of this case are very simple, and the evidence is without complications.

2 The complainant a Woman Police Constable, had a sister named Franzine Baptist. According to the evidence of the complainant, on a day in January of this year, her sister Franzine returned home, and told her that the defendant, who was a neighbour, and another girl, had just called her “whoring Franzine.”

3 The complainant said that about 15 minutes later, after her sister had told her this, she saw the defendant passing on the street where they lived, going in the direction of defendant's home. The complainant said she approached the defendant, and remonstrated with her, telling her to discontinue the behaviour, whereupon the defendant commenced to utter some indecent words.

4 The complainant said she thereupon arrested the defendant, and a struggle then ensued between them. The complainant was trying to overpower the defendant in order to escort her to the police station and in the struggle the defendant kicked her on the left breast.

5 Franzine Baptist also gave evidence, and it appears that her testimony, in some respects, conflicted with the evidence of the complainant. But it appears she is a person of tender years, as is the defendant, and appeared to be nervous in the witness stand.

6 It appears also that when the complainant was cross examined by the solicitor for the defendant, the cross examination being lengthy, she appears at one stage to have become annoyed, and told the court she did not know her mother's name.

7 Corporal 223 Guzman deposed to having received a telephone call from the complainant and responding, he and the complainant went to the home of the defendant, and escorted her to the police station. There she was formally charged with using indecent words, resisting arrest, and causing harm.

8 The defendant in giving evidence, denied committing any of the charges, and said it was the complainant who attacked her and tore off her blouse. She admitted that although she was a neighbour of Franzine, they were enemies and did not get on well with each other.

9 Defendant's sister Eleanor Flowers, in the main, gave evidence, which supported the story of the defendant. She said she was in her kitchen when the incident started and she witnessed the incident.

10 The complainant's mother was summoned and gave evidence. Eileen Sanchez said that that morning when she reached home, she met the complainant struggling with the defendant in front of the defendant's gate, and the complainant had the defendant held around the neck. She said she did not know how the incident started but on arrival, advised both to behave themselves. She asked her daughter the complainant what happened and she told her she was going to arrest the defendant.

11 On this evidence the learned magistrate found the defendant guilty of using indecent words, and acquitted her of the other charges. He also bound over both the complainant and defendant to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for a period of six months, in default the sum of $50.00.

12 The magistrate appears to have arrived at his conclusions by a strained or strange process of reasoning, which is open to severe criticism.

13 In summing up the case the learned magistrate commented that he acquitted the defendant of the charge of causing harm because he believed that the defendant (in kicking WPC Goff on the left breast) was acting in self defence, as up to that time the defendant had not been arrested. In relation to the charge of resisting arrest, the learned magistrate reasoned that the complainant's mother had stated that when she got to the scene, the incident was almost finished. So he acquitted the defendant of that charge.

14 The learned magistrate has also submitted in writing, his remarks regarding his decision in this case. I regard these remarks as taking the place of a magistrate's reasons for his decision when a defendant lodges notice of appeal in a case he has adjudicated upon. However, I have not regarded this document as being in any sense, material upon which I could make definitive...