BVI News

Acquitted cop may seek compensation from gov’t, says attorney

“I think that some thought should be given by the authorities to compensating Mr Henry for all he has been put through” — Queen’s Counsel Ian Wilkson

Shawn Henry, the police officer recently acquitted of criminal wrongdoings, may seek compensation from the government, his Attorney Ian Wilkinson has said.

Wilkinson, a Queen’s Counsel (QC), gave that statement to BVI News moments after Henry was acquitted at the High Court last Friday.

The attorney said: “He (Henry) is contemplating his legal options going forward and I cannot rule it (seeking compensation) out. It is his decision but I think based on the evidence or lack thereof, I think that some thought should be given by the authorities to compensating Mr Henry for all he has been put through.”

No case from day one

Wilkinson, in the meantime, said the Crown’s case against his client was lacking from the outset.

“We made a submission to the court that there was no case to answer [and] that the prosecution failed to establish that my client, Mr Henry, was involved in any conspiracy to steal with the other accused men,” the attorney said.

“We were persistent in this from day one. All Mr Henry did turn up at the various scenes and discharged his duties as a police officer,” he added.

QC Wilkinson said Henry who is a native of Jamaica was remanded on April 5, 2016, and “as fate would have it, he was acquitted on the anniversary date”, three years later.

Time to move on

Wilkinson said while Henry, who holds a Master’s degree in Business Administration, is still part of the Royal Virgin Islands Police Force (RVIPF) on reduced pay, it is yet to be seen whether he or the RVIPF is interested in fully reinstating him.

The Queen’s Counsel told BVI News his client did well during his tenure as an active police officer.

“Mr Henry was able to recover $1 million, drugs valued at $40 million, other hundreds of kilograms of cocaine and he has many citations. Mr Henry is someone who is highly intelligent and who believes in helping all who require help,” he said.

“Unfortunately, his life was put on hold over the past three to four years, and he is hoping to rebuild. [But] he has been vindicated, and justice has been done.”

Henry

His co-accused, Simon Power was also acquitted of one of two charges that was brought against him – acquisition, possession or use of proceeds of criminal conduct.

Similar to Henry, Power’s attorney, Israel Bruce made a no case submission which the court upheld. The charge of conspiracy to steal against Power and the third accused cop, Pamphill Prevost, still stands.

The trial continues for Power and Prevost.

Copyright 2020 BVI News, Media Expressions Limited. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.

28 Comments

Disclaimer: BVI News and its affiliated companies are not responsible for the content of comments posted or for anything arising out of use of the comments below or other interaction among the users.

  1. :) says:

    I think its time for a new DPP and AG in the BVI.

    Like 19
    Dislike 5
    • Shorty says:

      The funny thing with this case a special prosecutor was brought in from the United Kingdom to handle this case. The BVI has only had one excellent DPP in all its time Mr. Terrence Williams since he left so has the standards and prosecution in the DPP office. The way all the DPP after Mr. Williams have treated staff in the office is ridiculous and sadly no one from the government has the b***s to address the matter. The new DPP mafia isn’t any better than R******e. Cheaper Mr. Gr***m had gotten the position but we know why.

      Like 7
      Dislike 2
      • Specialist counsel??? says:

        The same specialist counsel was responsible for losing the 3rd attempt to extradite Bob. His specialism seems to be in acting for the Govt and losing.

    • Concerned says:

      What the AG has to do with this matter?

      Like 1
      Dislike 1
    • Mirror says:

      What has the AG got to do with this? Such an ignorant comment.

  2. NARCISSUS says:

    Big up Henry my youth dat boy smart!

    Like 3
    Dislike 6
  3. No nonsense says:

    Gu sidung!! Nonsense to the 10power. And what happen to his pullow case of money? Full deportation and set an example for the the others. And the treasury NEED the money

    Like 11
    Dislike 4
  4. You know what? says:

    Let’s hope that the police officers who testified in the case truly testified to the whole truth and nothing but the truth…and that it was not a case of police officer covering for each other.

    Like 10
  5. true says:

    he was only acquitted of 1 charge, morello follow

  6. BVI lawyer says:

    Every person who has ever accused of a crime and then acquitted at trial says that they will sue the Government. But very few of them ever do, and with good reason. Being accused and acquitted is not enough – you need to show malicious prosecution intent – and that is very hard. Winning on a submission of ‘no case’ was very fortunate for the accused – but it doesn’t mean he was wrongfully prosecuted.

    Like 12
  7. tifunny says:

    From the outset when I heard that certain prosecutor will prosecute the case I said oh boy the government will have to make a big pay out. Yet — wants to be DPP. I think the DPP should always come from outside. NOT **funny. wasting the courts time

    Like 7
    Dislike 1
    • Really yourself bossman says:

      Why would you be in the media making issues about suing or not suing and the case is still going on against your co-accused this might be the same reason why the juror might want to come with a verdict against them, be humble sir there are still others in the bucket…..the jurors might just because of your bad mindedness target the two other men and say they are not going to let them off to prevent the Gov’t with a huge trio law suit tsk tsk tsk

      Like 10
      Dislike 4
  8. Weak case says:

    So why then if from outset this case was weak it still went b4 a high court? You initially charged three persons with planning/conspiring not with stealing but planning together, one walks so what does that mean? Doesn’t it leave the jurors now to try to punish the others just because their no case was not successful?
    These mean are before a court for planning to steal conspiring to steal but all that is being shown is theft, so because theft occurred it means it was planned amongst three persons?
    It could have been one rogue amongst the three did it.
    This are three persons who was said to have built a house then there was no proof that one assisted so his name was written off but the original charge was all three built it together. if one then is out how can number two and three be guilty of planning with number one when there is no existence of a number one?
    Someone made a blunder but now it’s difficult for these two other men now because everyone else may think because a no case failed it means they are G….

  9. Really? says:

    these jurors should please keep their mind opened, this is not a theft case, it’s a conspiracy, how can one say because u are at a show u planned to go there?
    How many times did you just end up somewhere get into a fight or meet a new friend but did not plan it?
    Think about it they may not have planned it, yes monies may have gone missing but was a plan to take monies or did the opportunity arise and it was taken advantage of by one person?

    Like 10
    • Exactly says:

      And what about those who counted the money? Was the opportunity taken advantage of there and not with those 3. Too much speculation. Where is the conspiracy then?

      Like 5
      Dislike 1
  10. Only Jehovah God knows says:

    This involves a lot of hatred and for some reason I believe that there is more here that just what is being shown….wooow

    Like 6
    Dislike 1
  11. Anonymous says:

    Free world boss

  12. What you are doing is wrong says:

    Two other persons are still involved in the case and you are out there running your mouth. Officer what you are doing is bad for the two other persons guilty or not but by your arrogance you might make the jurors try to punish these two other men. And I believe the jurors would have like to have gotten a say with a decision about you.
    Right now the jurors can say they don’t care about the evidence or the lack there of and just go in hard against the two others.
    Keep your mouth shut and stay out of the media big man

    Like 4
    Dislike 1
  13. soo says:

    Is it right for the QC to go to the media seeking compensation for his client when the other two accomplished are still being tried?

    • and your point is?????? says:

      I think you have a problem with reading and understand. he said he and his client are keeping his options OPEN. I guess it was too clear for your small mind.

  14. Who Knows says:

    If he was not part of the operations and showed up at all, how did he know about them except by conspiring, so if he was not conspiring how did he know about the operations to turn up? and if he was not part of the operations why was he carrying away the money?
    Let the truth be told, the law is a jack ass

    • Reporting line. says:

      Because the superiors in the RVIPF authorized him to go on the operations. Stop being an a**. In my opinion the Senior officers are the ones who should be on trial.

      Now they want to act like they did not know how he showed up on the operations. Can’t fool me for sure.

  15. jackie says:

    Officer Henry is a good cop.From the beginning I never believed he was involved.God is good all the time.The bad apples are been exposed.

    Like 1
    Dislike 2
  16. @Jackie says:

    Oh you always knew that? Were you one of the cops
    Who signed the petition against him? Now all of you will sing a different song and pretend that you were on his side but I am certain he sees you for the snake you are.

Leave a Comment

Shares