Unexpected rejection

WE FEEL a sense of relief, of course, that the kidnap ordeal of Rodney Deosaran has ended after 41 days and that the young man is safely reunited with his family. We hope that the nightmare of ten-year-old Vijay Persad, who was kidnapped from his home at Indian Walk, Moruga, almost two months ago, would also soon be ended and that the little boy would be returned unharmed into the bosom of his family. Not only this newspaper but the media as a whole have been concerned about these two kidnappings and we have done what we could in keeping public interest in them alive and playing a part in the effort to have them freed.
     
It is our view, and this has been confirmed by the Police, that the prominent reporting of kidnap offences, particularly the publishing of pictures of the victims, has been helpful in solving some of these cases. So that while it is our responsibility to report on incidents of crime in the country, we are pleased to know that, at the same time, we can be part of the solution, particularly in cases of kidnapping. This is why we were shocked and horrified by the abuse and threats which members of the media encountered when they visited the Carapichaima home of Ronald Deosaran’s millionaire father, Jawaharlal, on Sunday to report on the return of his son and to share the family’s relief with a concerned public. Instead of the welcome they expected, personnel from the broadcast media were not only refused entry into the Deosaran mansion but were met by a hostile security guard who pointed a gun at them, threatening to shoot if they did not move away from in front the gate.

Earlier in the day, when reporters from Newsday and another daily sought interviews with Rodney and his father they were rejected by a female voice through the intercom: “Not at all. No media, no media, none, never.” When Newsday asked the female relative why they were so hostile to the press who were always there for them, especially when they wanted to make numerous pleas to Rodney’s kidnappers to release him unharmed, she replied: “No, stupid question. Do not call back. Do not come back here. We don’t need you all, go!” In trying to get the story, Newsday ran into more abuse and threats from Rodney’s in-laws at their Orange Field home. A relative of Deosaran’s wife, Jaime, shouted at us: “Hello, hello, we don’t want anybody here. If we see anything published we would be suing. Go away, or else.”

This sudden and unexpected hostility from the Deosarans is difficult to understand. Now that Rodney’s ordeal is over, why are they refusing to speak to the media? Whatever their reasons may be, we can take the rejection, however puzzling. After all, rebuffs are the accepted occupational hazard of reporters and journalists. What we refuse to take, however, is the criminal recklessness of a security guard who withdraws his firearm and points it at media representatives, threatening  to shoot them if they do not disperse from the public area outside the gate of Jawaharlal Deosaran’s sprawling mansion. That we consider to be an intolerable outrage and we seriously expect that the Commissioner of Police will be doing something about it. Reporters and other media representatives going about their duties must not be subjected to that kind of intimidation and dangerous jeopardy, not in a country that cherishes freedom of the press. Also, the problem of poorly trained security guards, particularly those that are armed, is unfortunately still with us.