Sarah Reed Campaign: Time To ReformMental Health Legislation

Justice 4 Sarah Reed Campaign: 

A Call For Change.

Time To Reform

Mental Health Legislation

Sarah Reed, a 32-year-old black woman, mother, daughter and aunt died in deeply suspicious circumstances in London’s Holloway Prison on 11th January 2016. As a black woman, Sarah Reed faced institutionalised racism, sexism and mental health stigma, this intersectionality, doubled down the horrendous discrimination she faced.

Sarah left behind one surviving daughter, and her mother and brother and extended family members. Sarah suffered mental ill health after the tragic death of her first-born baby after a period of illness.

Sarah and her partner were dispatched in a taxi from hospital, with her deceased baby wrapped in a blanket, told to go and find an undertaker. It was this tragic loss of her baby daughter, the unbelievably callous action of the hospital, police racism and brutality that sent her into a descending spiral of mental ill health.

Sarah was to later suffer a brutal assault by Metropolitan Police Service Police Constable James Kiddie who was subsequently charged and found guilty of assaulting Sarah and was eventually sacked.

Sarah then spent time in and out of hospital suffering as a result of the police assault. Whilst in hospital Sarah alleges she was a victim of a sexual assault by a member of the hospital staff. The Metropolitan Police were called and bizarrely she was arrested, not the offender and taken to Brixton Police station.

What then transpired was long periods of police and prison detention without Sarah being given her prescribed medications. At the time of her death in prison, Sarah had not been given her prescribed medication for some time, despite it being known that she suffered from a recognised mental condition. It’s reported that Prison staff were punishing Sarah behavior instead of treating her obvious condition.

As a result the new social movement Blaksox at the request of the family, established Justice 4 Sarah Reed Campaign to highlight the acute failures of the all those many institutions, who came into contact with Sarah. Organisations, such as the Metropolitan Police, Maudsley Hospital, Holloway Women’s Prison, Highpoint House Memorial Hospital, and the now closed Richard House Children’s Hospice run by Newham Health Authority.

We believe that no mentally ill person should be kept in a police or prison cell. Current mental health law deems police and prison cells as ‘places of safety’ for those suffering mental ill health.

We welcome the new guidelines issues to the police on the handling suspects suffering mental ill health, however we say that there are few if any circumstances in which the lengthy detention of those with mental ill health in police or prison custody is neither humane nor justified.

The Justice 4 Sarah Reed Campaign believes that both police stations and prisons should be removed from UK mental health legislation as appropriate an ‘place of safety’.

Existing Legislation

The Mental Health Act 1983 (“the 1983 Act”) provides for the statutory detention of people suffering from mental ill health, without their consent for the stated purpose of public safety health assessment, care and treatment.

The powers conferred on the Police to remove people if they are in private property (under Section 135) and in a public place (under Section 136), and appear to be suffering from a mental disorder, allow them to be taken to a ‘place of safety’ (for example, a hospital, a care home or a police station), to enable a mental health assessment to be carried out and to make appropriate arrangements for ongoing care if this is deemed necessary.

However neither police stations nor most prisons are adequately trained or geared up to manage and treat with care and compassion, those suffering mental health crises. Sarah case exemplifies the acute failures of the criminal justice system in treating those with mental ill health.

Reform of Section 135 and Section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983

In 2014 a joint Review of Section 135 and Section 136 by the Department of Health and Home Office, included recommendations for changes to improve the experiences of those suffering from mental health crisis.

The Government has also committed up to £15 million to improve the provision of community and health based places of safety in 2016 - 2017, and further to reduce the use of police cells.

However, we say that these changes do not go far enough and that Police stations and prisons must be removed as lawfully designated ‘places of safety’.

Mental health measures in the Governments proposed Police and Crime Bill are currently being discussed in parliament.

Whilst we welcome currently proposed parliamentary changes to legislation, however we believe that much more needs to be done.

The current facts are that Police station cells are still being used far too regularly to detain those suffering mental health crisis, although there was a slight reduction from 6, 667 in 2013/14 to 4, 537 in 2014/15.

There is emerging cross party consensus that no one, suffering mental ill health, under the age of 18, should be taken to a police cell. However we remain concerned that an acute shortage of beds in secure mental health hospitals will mean that maintaining current reductions will be increasingly difficulty and that as a result further reductions will be difficult to achieve.

There also widespread concerns about the length of time for which people can be detained, and it is proposed in the new legislation that legal detention is to reduced from 72 hours to 24 hours.

We are in touch with other agencies such as MIND and Inquest who are lobbying parliament with a view to effect a change in the Policing and Crime Bill.

This is Bill makes provision for the collaboration of emergency services and seeks to amend the existing powers of Police under the Mental Health Act 1983.

We support Mind’s proposed amendments to detention arrangement relating to both Section 135 and Section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983.

Including;

• Use of police stations being removed for those under 18, and used only in exceptional circumstances in the case of adults
• The adoption of a wider definition of “places of safety” to include the third sector (even if only on a temporary basis), to extend local capacity to meet local need
• That the police can act promptly without a need for a warrant to protect property and individuals from harm when they are in a public place, but a warrant would still be required for access to private dwellings
• To reduce the maximum period for which a person can be detained (as mentioned above) from 72 hours to 24 hours (with an extension to 36 hours exceptionally)
• Before detaining a person under section 136 the police should consult (where practicable) a health professional.,
• If appropriate, mental health assessments should take place in a private home
• If Police Officers have reasonable grounds for believing that a person has a dangerous item concealed on them and presents a danger to themselves and others then the police officers can search that person.

Why this reform needs to happen.

We believe that police cells should never be used as a place of safety and would support Baroness Walmsley’s Lords amendment to clause 79 of the Policing and Crime Bill that is now at Committee Stage in the House of Lords.

In 2015 - 2016 in England and Wales, 28,271 adults were picked up by police in mental health crisis.

Most were taken to a health-based place of safety, 2,100 were held in police cells for mental health assessment because there was no more suitable place of safety available.

There has been a huge reduction in these numbers amounting to 53.7 % reduction in 2014 - 2015 whilst this is very much welcomed, much more needs to be done.

Sarah Reed’s recorded medical failures in Holloway Prison and prisoner officer abuse in a series of telephone calls, and in letters to her Mum,

“Mum, I shouldn’t be here. I have not been given my medication…”

The Committee stage of this Bill in the House of Lords will be on 26th October 2016.

Join the Justice 4 Sarah Reed Campaign. Lobby Parliament.

We would urge you to:

1. Lobby your Members of Parliament and the House of Lords to support Minds proposed amendment.

2. Join the Justice 4 Sarah Reed Campaign and its supporters in demanding effecting change and justice for Sarah Reed’s daughter and her family, and for the many families of other individuals who have either died in police custody or in a prison.

Letter to Nick Herbert, Home Office from UFFC re: deaths in custody

C/o Inquest 89-93 Fonthill Road, London N4 3JH

Email Contactuffc@gmail.com                                                      Telephone: 07770 432 439

Your ref: M19541/11                                           Reply to: Marcia Rigg – Chair UFFC

By Email & Post – public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

                              Nick@nickherbert.com

The Rt. Hon Nick Herbert MP

Minister of State for Policing and Criminal Justice

2 Marsham Street

London SW1P 4DF

FOR PUBLICATION

30 January 2012

Dear Mr Herbert

Deaths in State Custody

Thank you for your letter of 7 December 2011 in reply to our letter to the Prime Minister of 28 October.

You state that the Independent Police Complaints Commission (the “IPCC”), a public body providing a specific service to the public is “independent – ‘by law’ – and they make their decisions independently of the police ….”.  You thereafter go on to outline the definition for what this means and to whom the IPCC are accountable and the procedures – by law – taken by the IPCC.  We thank you for your clarification.

We note that you make no reference to any report to the fact that 8 out of 9 senior investigators within the IPCC are ex-police officers.  Neither do you comment on the Home Affairs Select Committee’s Inquiry into the work of the IPCC and that the IPCC ‘fail to inspire public confidence’.

You also state that the IPCC will “stand up to scrutiny throughout both the coronal and (if applicable) criminal process”.  If the Home Secretary and Ministers and, in turn, Parliament, to whom the IPCC are accountable, were to investigate fairly and thoroughly, we have no doubt that it will be found that the IPCC requires urgent reform in order to be truly independent – as required by law.

With reference to the 6 priority areas identified by the IPCC to ensure that police forces learn and improve - specifically deaths and serious injuries in police custody - and that deaths, injuries and complaints reduce in number in order that the public’s confidence generally improves, we submit that there is sufficient evidence to show that, even after countless recommendations, including the voluminous recommendations given in the McPherson Report following the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry back in February 1997 having held that the police are institutionally racist and evidence of police corruption, there has been little improvement.

Following the recent welcomed “partial” justice by the Stephen Lawrence family, which was unnecessarily long over-due, due to the fact that the Lawrence family had to tirelessly pursue the judicial system for 18 years (and we are proud to say with dignity and remarkable strength), having received unacceptable service in the initial investigation by the police and the judicial system, it is widely accepted that there is still much work to do to bring about justice and change.

You say the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 makes clear that unlawful killing verdicts at Inquests may not be “framed” in such a way as to appear there is any question of criminality.  In contrast, unlawful killing verdicts are given by a jury who have scrutinised the evidence and “found” criminality, hence the unlawful killing verdict.  Any “realistic prospect of conviction” is then quashed by the Crown Prosecutor usually due to insufficient evidence, which evidence of course is likely to be in the custody of the police and in some instances conspiracy is engaged, hence the lack of conviction and accountability of any officer due to deliberate lack of evidence and denial.  So, it’s an unnecessary vicious circle - 18 years to get ‘partial’ justice when the evidence is available all along and after an unlawful killing verdict at an inquest.  Surely this is unlawful.  In any event, it is totally unacceptable. 

Not to mention the Alder family whereby after 13 years, like the Lawrence family, have tirelessly fought the judicial system for the unlawful killing by police (as was found by a jury at an inquest) of Christopher Alder, a solider whom had fought for this country - including the family taking the Crown Prosecution Service to court for not making the police officers accountable for their unlawful racist killing, and thereafter to the European Court of Justice - were further insulted by being informed that, contrary to the fact that the family had buried Christopher some 11 years ago, in fact, his body was still lying in a mortuary, 13 years after his death, and that the family had buried an elderly woman instead!

The Government’s recent unprecedented and highly unusual admittance of failures in that investigation; that it breached its obligations in regard to preserving life and ensuring that no one is subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment and the giving of an apology: - "The government of the United Kingdom regrets the occurrence of the actions which have led to the bringing of the present application, in particular the treatment in custody of the applicant's brother, Mr Christopher Alder, and the anguish that this treatment and his death have caused to his family.  The government accepts that the lack of an effective and independent investigation in this case constitutes a violation of the procedural obligations in articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Further, the government accept that the treatment that the applicant's brother received in police custody amounted to a substantive violation of article 3 with 14 of the Convention."  It is deeply worrying that even after all the unlawful treatment, Christopher’s body is still not buried.  The public are deeply alarmed at this and the Government should note that it is of the most greatest concern to us.

We note the list of charges that may be considered outlined by you where the case involves a death in custody or death after contact with the police and that the Government “fully endorses” the requirement for all deaths in custody to be sufficiently investigated under the States obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights.  Thank you for your clarification.  It is for this reason that you will be pleased to know that on 20 January 2012 the United Families and Friends Campaign supported by others, including the Rev Jessie Jackson of the Civil Rights Movement, launched an e-Petition to 10 Downing Street for there to be an independent inquiry into deaths in custody and no doubt this should contribute to the endorsement. 

You give no reasonable explanation as to why there are no plans to place cameras in police vehicles.  Wasted costs carrying out unnecessarily long drawn out investigations from the public purse could be better spent on cameras at the back of police vehicles.  With respect, and in the interests of the public and the police, and transparency, and the fact that the Government are aware of the genuine concerns of the public about what sometimes happens unlawfully inside some police vehicles by some police officers (such as death or near death or serious injury), this is unbalanced.  For instance, irrespective of the Data Protection Act, cameras are placed on buses, trains, taxi’s, on the street, almost everywhere ‘Big Brothers’ watching, except inside police vehicles. Why? If there is something to hide (which there is), then this is unacceptable to the public.

In contrast, however, CCTV evidence is crucial in any police investigation against the public, and rightly so.  Imagine if police investigations against the public encountered the lack of witnesses or CCTV or the CCTV was not working or had been tampered with in order to conceal any crucial evidence, or even concealed by the police for some reason, criminals would evade murder charges as there would be insufficient evidence and therefore no realistic prospect of conviction, even though there are instances where it is known that a murder was committed by a named person or persons.  Alarmingly, there would be killers on the loose.  Obviously, and we agree, this would be unacceptable by the Government and the public.

You appear in your letter to be ‘tactfully’ silent on the alarming statistics of deaths in custody, apart from repeating the fact that the Government say they regret all these deaths. The Independent Advisory Panel (the “IAP”) on Deaths in Custody report published in 2011 states: “… in total, there were 5,998 deaths recorded for the 11 years from 2000 to 2010.  This is an average of 545 deaths per year.  Despite the fact there have been 11 unlawful killing verdicts since 1990 there has never been a successful prosecution.”  One should consider, as the Government appears to - by law - doing, whether there has been any improvement in respect of deaths in custody?  If not, why is there no improvement?  Should officers be made accountable for these deaths?  Perhaps if officers and/or officials were properly made accountable for criminal offences, as would a member of the public, things would improve and it would be in the public’s interest to do so.

Nor do you comment on the necessity of officers and/or officials being interviewed by the IPCC immediately after a death in police custody or the prevention of collusion between officers and/or officials (which is unlawful) or full disclosure to families.  Does your silence offer the possibility that police corruption (which is unlawful) is still institutionalised?

We politely repeat that in respect of the Legal Services Commission’s procedure outlined in your letter and reiterated previously by Crispin Blunt; the procedure is unfair.  The State has a duty of care and families should not have to contribute costs for representation at any inquest to find out how their loved one died whilst in the said State’s care.  With respect, an inquest is not a private prosecution by the family. An inquest is a fact-finding exercise and not a method of apportioning guilt. The procedure and rules of evidence, which are suitable for a trial, is unsuitable for an inquest. It is an inquisitorial process, a process of investigation.  The proceedings and evidence at an Inquest shall be directed solely to ascertaining the following matters, namely who the deceased was, how, when and where the deceased came by his death, and the particulars required by the legislative Acts to be registered concerning the death.

We are disappointed that the Prime Minister (to whom we are copying this letter) has not felt it courteous to reply personally to the UFFC or to offer his acceptance or declination to the invitation to meet some of its members; if only to show his sympathy and to listen to the families for the loss of their loved one whilst in the care of the State, and the fact that families were grieving outside his residence.  This would show some regret.

Again, we invite the Prime Minister to meet with us.  A direct voice to express concerns with Mr Cameron would be appreciated.

This is an open letter, as with previous correspondence and in the interests of the public.  All our rights are reserved.

United Families and Friends

Cc:      The Prime Minister, The Rt Hon David Cameron MP

 Open letter from UFFC to the Prime Minister re: deaths in state custody:

 http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/10/open-letter-from-uffc-to-prime-minister.html



Letter from Nick Herbert(Minister for Policing and Criminal Justice):
7th December 2011
 http://uffc-campaigncentral.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/letter-from-Nick-Herbert.pdf 

Why we need an independent public inquiry into suspicious deaths in custody.

A heartfelt letter was delivered to the Prime Minister from the UFFC (United Friends and Family Campaign). The letter called on him to respond to the scandal of suspicious deaths in custody and set up a public inquiry. The Government rather short-sightedly rejected this demand.

Police kettle the UFFC March outside 10 Downing St. in 2011 (Photo by Dee Constantine-Simms)

At the time of Mark Duggan’s shooting by the Met Police in Tottenham in August of 2011 the family were desperate for answers. Such is the statutory contempt with which British black communities are now viewed, it was not felt remotely necessary to contact the Duggan family to explain what had happened to their son, brother and father. I have written on this issue before and you can read more here.

 Last October the UFFC organised a march of families to Downing Street to deliver their letter to number 10. Unbelievably, the Metropolitan Police attacked that peaceful march. Despite attending one of the last meetings of the Metropolitan Police Authority raising our objections and the Commissioner himself promising UFFC a meeting, to date the Commissioner has not organised this meeting.



(Picture by Dee Constantine-Simms)



One would have thought that even the most callous indifference in political circles would have recognised the need to positively respond to both the UFFC complaint and the need to urgently contact the Duggan family at the time of the tragic killing. Not so, such indifference and gross insensitivity are now the statutory stock Government and police response to acute black concerns.

The UFFC letter demanding a public inquiry represents families of all races of and faiths. All united, having endured the lack of accountability of the police, the infectiveness of the Independents Police Commission and the antiquated medieval Inquest process.

(Photo by Dee Constantine-Simms)

These processes leave most families doubly victimized as a consequence of a search for the truth, frustrated by a process of administrative injustice that is stacked against them.

We should not be surprised however as the contempt of this Government and the Police is palpable. What little response we do get can be best characterised as patronising drivel, carefully orchestrated into bleeding heart headline sound bites. All designed to convey a level of political concern that is betrayed by biased partiality.

Our marginalisation even extends to all sections of Whitehall. For example, there is not a single black or ethnic minority organisation in the UK sat at the Government policy table.

These issues as so tragically demonstrated in August 2011, continue to have the power and potential to ignite alienated communities, whose deep distrust of the police can result in riotous carnage ripping thorough British cities.

The consequence’s of such profound marginalisation is growing levels of anger that remains unrecognised by the politicians until it is too late.

In order to avoid future civil unrest and begin the process of restoring trust and confidence in the police we need an open and transparent judicial public inquiry. This would have the effect of providing families and communities with hope that justice will be done and statutory agencies will be held to account. An Inquiry would bring parity and justice for families seeking the truth when their loved ones die in suspicious circumstances.

To novitiate this demand we should call on Keith Vaz MP, Chair of the Parliamentary Home Affairs Select Committee to conduct a scrutiny on this issue.

Given the forthcoming London Mayoral elections we should also call on upon the new head of the Met Police, Boris Johnson, to immediately set up an independent judicial inquiry into this issue. He now has the power and the budget to do so. And so I ask that we now all fully support the recently launched email petition for a public inquiry launched by the UFCC.

Humanitarian justice demands it. The collective peace and safety of British cities may well depend on it.

Lee Jasper

Click here to sign: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/26276

Official launch of UFFC No.10 Petition re: deaths in custody UK

No:10 Petition - 2012

Deaths in police, prison, mental health & immigration detention

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/26276

The United Families & Friends Campaign (UFFC) calls for an independent judicial inquiry into all suspicious deaths in custody.

UFFC is a coalition of families and friends of those that have died in the custody of police and prison officers as well as those who died in psychiatric and immigration detention. It also has members and supporters from campaign groups and advocacy organisations from across the UK.

The Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody report published in 2011 states: in total, there were 5,998 deaths recorded for the 11 years from 2000 to 2010. This is an average of 545 deaths per year. Despite the fact there have been 11 unlawful killing verdicts since 1990 there has never been a successful prosecution.

Our joint efforts have yielded some results. The police self-investigation of deaths was replaced by the Independent Police Complaints Commission and the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman now investigates deaths in prison and immigration detention. The Attorney General was forced to undergo a review of the role of the Crown Prosecution Service, and corporate manslaughter laws are now extended to custody deaths.

However, these reforms have not addressed the lack of justice in outstanding cases. We believe that equitable dispensation justice in the UK must be done and be seen to be done if the general public are to enjoy high levels of trust and confidence in the fair administration of justice.

The poor quality and speed of independent investigations conducted by the Independent Police Complaints Commission and an Inquest process that is seriously under resourced, subject to delay and limited in remit and is not fit for purpose. Both critically fail to protect or support the rights of victims or their families.

Our Demands:

1.  Replacement of the IPCC to ensure open robust transparent and thorough investigations from the very outset of police deaths in custody - with a removal of all ex-police officers for it to be a truly independent body.

2.  The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman should be placed on a statutory footing.

3.  Deaths in psychiatric detention and / or of those detained under the Mental Health Act must be subject to a system of properly funded investigation that is completely independent of the Health Service.

4.  Officers and officials directly involved in custody deaths are suspended until investigations are completed.

5.  Immediate interviewing of officers and all officials concerned with the death.

6.  Officers and officials should never be allowed to collude over their evidence and statements of fact.

7.  Full and prompt disclosure of information to the families affected.

8.  Prosecutions should automatically follow ‘unlawful killing’ verdicts at Inquests and officers responsible for those deaths should face criminal charges, even if retired.

9.  Implementation of police body cameras and cameras in all police vehicles in the interests of both the officers and the public.

10.             There should be an automatic right to non means tested legal aid for families. There is a lack of funds for family legal representation at Inquests whilst officers and NHS staff get full legal representation from the public purse – this is unbalanced.

US civil rights veteran, Rev Jesse Jackson supports the inquiry campaign.

Petition Link:  http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/26276

UFFC website:  http://uffc-campaigncentral.net/


UFFC Facebook Group: http://www.facebook.com/pages/United-Families-Friends-Campaign-UFFC/308702409174443?sk=wall
        

Facebook Petition page:  http://www.facebook.com/events/167075506731920/

For those wishing to lobby their local MP: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

___________________________

INJUSTICE - watch full documentary now at:  http://vimeo.com/34633260
(2001/98 minutes/UK/Dir: Ken Fero & Tariq Mehmood/Migrant Media)

The struggles for justice by the families of people that have died in police custody.

In 1969 David Oluwale became the first black person to die in police custody in Britain. Many others have died since then. None of the police officers involved have been convicted of these deaths. In this documentary, the families of these victims ask "Why not?"

This is a blow by blow account of the relentless struggles of the families as they find out how they lost their loved ones in extremely violent deaths at the hands of police officers.
Each family is met with a wall of official secrecy and the film documents how they unite and challenge this together. The documentary uses powerful exclusive footage filmed over a five year period and witnesses the families pain and anger at the killings. It documents the fight to retrieve the bodies for burial, the mockery of police self-investigation and the collusion of the legal system in the deaths. The film asks why an accused killer in a police uniform is not judged by the same standards as the rest of society.

I N J U S T I C E documents the horrific loss of life at the hands of the state and it's attempts to cover up these killings. The British police have been responsible for hundreds of deaths and have walked free.The families of the dead want justice and they will not stop until they have got it.

Winner Best Documentary - BFM London Film Festival 2002, Winner National Social Justice Award 2003, Winner Best Documentary (Human Rights) - One World Film Festival 2003, Winner New Nation Campaign group of the Year 2004.

___________________________________

Articles re: deaths in custody:

Deaths in custody: Huge rise in London: http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/06/deaths-in-custody-huge-rise-in-london.html

Open letter from UFFC to the Prime Minister re: deaths in state custody:  http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/10/open-letter-from-uffc-to-prime-minister.html

Christopher Alder: outrage as injustice continues even in death:  http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/11/christopher-alder-outrage-as-injustice.html

 

Christopher Alder: Justice remains little more than an ideal for some - by Richard Sudan: http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/11/christopher-alder-justice-remains.html 

 

Demetre Fraser: Outrage at new death in police custody: http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/06/demetre-fraser-outrage-at-new-death-in.html 

 

Rev Jesse Jackson supports call for public inquiry into deaths in custody UK - videos:  http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/12/rev-jesse-jackson-calls-for-public.html

Rev Jessie Jackson calling for total reform on handling of deaths in custody: http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/12/rev-jessie-jackson-calling-for-total.html

Deaths in Police Custody: Stereotyping the victim - article from the Institute of Race Relations: http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/09/deaths-in-police-custody-stereotyping.html

Deaths in police custody cut deep in the psyche of black Britons:  http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/12/deaths-in-police-custody-cut-deep-in.html

United Friends and Family:

Annual Deaths in Custody March Attacked by Police.

 http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/10/united-friends-and-family-annual-deaths.html

 

MPA meeting - Regarding the policing of this years peaceful UFFC march: http://leejasper.blogspot.com/2011/11/mpa-meeting-regarding-policing-of-this.html



UFFC march 2011 (Photos by Dee Constantine-Simms)



Campaign 4 Justice 4 Kingsley Burrell:

www.facebook.com/Justice4Kingsley

 

Campaign 4 Justice 4 Demetre Fraser aka T.Dot:

www.facebook.com/Justice4Demetre

_____________________