By LEANDRA ROLLE

Tribune Chief Reporter

lrolle@tribunemedia.net

CRIME consultant Carlos Reid has called for accountability after a man accused of murdering a key witness in his armed robbery case allegedly breached his bail conditions 81 times before the killing, saying “somebody dropped the ball”.

Mr Reid said the repeated violations should never have gone unchecked and urged authorities to investigate how the accused allegedly failed to report to police for months without being brought back before the court.

“I think somebody should be accountable. Somebody should be made to bear,” he told The Tribune yesterday. “No, we can't wait until like somebody die before we sound that alarm.”

His comments came after a 39-year-old man was charged on Monday with murdering James McPhee on Carmichael Road on July 12, weeks before McPhee was expected to testify in the accused man’s armed robbery trial.

Prosecutors allege the accused failed to report to his local police station on 81 occasions between January 3 and July 8.

He attempted to plead guilty to violating his bail conditions, but the court entered a not guilty plea after he disputed the prosecution’s account of the offence.

Mr Reid said the electronic monitoring provider informed him that the accused remained under electronic surveillance and had not gone off the grid.

He argued that authorities could have easily located the man by checking the monitoring system or contacting the provider after he allegedly stopped reporting to the police station.

“That should’ve never happened and in the future, we hope that don't happen again,” he said. “If the court sanctions that you sign it, then you sign in. If you miss signing in, then you're in breach of a court order. You should be taken back to court and if there's any time that they wanted to find that person, that person was being monitored. They could have found him in a heartbeat.”

Asked whether police should have alerted McPhee, Mr Reid said the attorney general should examine the issue and determine what authorities are required to do when an accused person repeatedly breaches a reporting condition.

“We have to start someplace,” he said. “If there's a breach, what is the protocol for that? If somebody refuses to sign in when they have been summoned to sign in, then what is the next step? I think that needs to be looked at, and that should never happen and in speaking with the Minister of National Security, that will never happen again.”

However, Attorney General Wayne Munroe yesterday played down the public safety significance of the reporting condition, saying its purpose is to ensure that an accused person appears for trial.

“The more positive way that we have to protect the public with people on bail if they're considered dangerous is to electronically monitor them,” he said. “That way you know where they are 24 hours a day, as opposed to the one moment you walk in a police station and sign a book or do the biometric thing so the condition of signing into a police station is about preventing from you absconding.”

Asked whether the alleged breaches were nevertheless alarming, Mr Munroe questioned why someone being electronically monitored would also need to report to a police station.

“If he's being electronically monitored, I don't understand why somebody who's being electronically monitored needs to sign in at a police station,” he said. “You know where to find him 24 hours a day.”

Mr Munroe again said anyone who feels threatened can alert the police. He said officers would investigate and determine whether the witness should be removed from their home or relocated elsewhere.