by Colin Hyde

I do not doubt the young woman who accused the doctor, but when it comes to a person’s character I will give as much space as it is possible for me to give. I think William Shakespeare said, steal my purse but don’t steal my name. I will wait to hear the doctor’s story. If I had to make a judgment on the spot, I’d say that on this score he is a dirty, rotten fellow. But we don’t have to make an on-the-spot judgment.

All of us come short of the glory, but some of us err pretty badly. The charge is absolutely horrific, a violation of trust and professional ethics that could have ramifications far beyond the lives of the accused and the accuser, both of whom must be experiencing excruciating torment, one because of the actions of the other. I said I haven’t passed judgment on the accused. And I do not doubt the accuser. That isn’t an impossible position. It’s limbo; it’s a “haze” while we wait for all that pertains to the matter to come out. I could go on. But let’s just leave that there.

There is a mental fault called kleptomania. In bare bones, the person jos love fu teef. We know about the mental fault called gluttony because all of us have a touch of it. And some of us flat out can’t turn down food. I think it was Aria, on social media, who said that, appropriately, a responsible female nurse should have been in the room. So, the brother doctor should not even have had the chance to do what he is accused of.

What happened here, the charge of a terrible violation and all that brings, and the potential tragedy, ending of a hard-earned career and condemnation and maybe jail, happened all because we like to play simple. It was all over the US news how the doctor for their gymnastic team touched the girls where they shouldn’t be touched. Can you imagine a male physiotherapist massaging the groin of young women? Why do we like to play so simple? No, I don’t say the doctor is guilty of the crime, that’s for a court or medical tribunal to decide.

I think in all situations the question we must answer is, have we done our best? In too many situations those in authority are terribly guilty of being lax. Oh, in so many situations we can’t be bothered, even if we are being paid to care.

Dolores scolds 7, but the breach was all the fault of the authorities

Minister Dolores’s charge that Channel 7 was lowdown tabloid in its reporting on the charge by a young woman that her doctor had done her wrong, that that television station needs to check itself, I think every reporter, journalist, and opinionist should weigh in; one, because Minister Dolores shouldn’t on her “own” decide what is good and what is bad, and two, there is need for all in the business to know the lines on the playing field.

I see Amandala columnist Glen (with a single “n”) has weighed in, and he suggests that the minister and her crew stand down. Glen said we step on a very slippery slope when we limit the media in the way they report a story. He said if a story is based on truth, if it is not seditious, malicious, or gossip, “threats should not be made by those in power” because they don’t like the way it is reported. I don’t know how far Glen would consider to be too far, but me, I like a limit. At the core I agree with the minister’s assessment of 7, about it being very into the sensational.

Before I bare myself on the sensationalism matter, I just have to put in how my mouth was left opened when I read, from Glen, that “in the US, I can say whatever I want about the President, or senators, or Congress, or any elected official, true or false, without fear of being sued.” And that’s a flat-out condemnation of these libel laws we have that work so well to insulate our big people from scrutiny. Glen said public officials “must accept the criticisms or innuendos or gossip that are hurled their way!”

Ministers of government and other bigwigs knew they had perfect immunity from scrutiny when George Price initiated and won a libel suit against the Amandala (the Reporter too) in 1982 because they ran a story from a foreign newspaper which implicated a man who claimed he was an associate of the father of the nation. It furthered the madness we are now in. Maybe Price didn’t understand the full implications of his decision to sue.

The court report said the Amandala publisher said he didn’t believe that Price was into anything nefarious, but he thought the matter was of public interest. Amandala had gotten an English translation of an article in a Mexican newspaper, and had extracted a few paragraphs. The details of this case, just like the Commission of Inquiry into PUP management of the DFC and SSB, and the Commission of Inquiry into UDP management of the Immigration Department, have never been fully aired out. Belizeans know less about this case than they knew about the 1919 Ex-Servicemen’s Riot before Peter Ashdown wrote about it more than six decades after it occurred. Welcome to Belize, the land of under the covers.

Good democracies borrow from others when they see them doing something right. Our neighbor up north has something right and we should follow. Bah, both main parties are ecstatic about the status quo. Private citizens need protection; those presiding over the people’s money have to be under the microscope. Daam right, Glen, politicians, the only group in society that has license to lie – what do you call making promises you know you cannot keep, and hiding information? – they and their bigwig friends should not be insulated from scrutiny.

About sensationalism, we have to accept that Belize’s media has competition for the local audience. There’s a world out there, just a channel switch away, and the license they have is far wider than what we have here. Whoa there, Ike Turner said “people buy bad news, dirty news.” I hear a lot of people couldn’t contain the urge to watch Mr. Jerry Springer and similar shows of base nature.

I think 7 is in breach. The story shouldn’t have gone much past a report of inappropriate behavior. And 7 accepts its guilt, but pleaded guilty with an explanation, which is that the authorities were flagrantly guilty of that ugly tactic which I have told you they had perfected to high science. The formula is brutal – ignore the problem, force our people to grin and bear it, and if it doesn’t go away, if they break under the strain and holler, call them out on their need for anger management, and if they get a little rude, question their sense of decency.

7 said it got no response from the authorities when it asked about the case. The young lady also felt the health authorities weren’t following up on the matter, so she went to the police. 7 said “we were sent the full details of the woman’s complaint with her consent so that we could act as a catalyst to provoke authorities to act.”

This is what you cause when you ignore people. So many things are out of control in Belize because we don’t buy into a stitch in time saves nine, that a half penny worth of tar saved the ship from sinking, and especially because we must protect our royalty no matter what. All, all the guilt here is on our authorities and their insistence on practicing the ugly art of ignore.