A week in pictures

The picture is that of the distraught mother captured at the moment of hearing of her only son’s murder. It has a powerful way of sucking you in to that place in that moment. You feel just a little bit of what she is feeling.

It’s called empathy because at the end of the day, in large measure, we do care about the well being of our fellow citizens.

There is also a growing feeling of, “There but for the grace of God go I” because on any given day we could find ourselves in a similar situation.

The picture has become a symbol of how lost many people feel — lost for ideas; lacking the courage or agency to draw the line firmly in the sand. We are moved to tears, to outrage, to marching even, but not quite to sustainable strategic action to change the things that we all know need to change.

What does that say about us? Responsibility for this crime, like so many others like it, spreads outward. At the centre, the one who committed this monstrous act, wielding the instrument of death against a child of insignificant physical stature, who was bound and gagged, with such force that the poor child’s throat was slit so deep the vertebrae at the back of his neck were also cut.

From where is such rage born? There is more to the evolution of such monstrous intent than failure of the police or tardiness of the courts, or absence of a government- driven crime prevention policy. Somewhere in that picture was the story of the way we treat each other; a story of payback.

And then there were the confusing pictures of Marlene Mc- Donald’s swearing-in ceremony.

In one picture she is seen laughing in a joyful and warm embrace with some friends, among them the notorious “Burkie,” whom she describes as being an example of the finest that East Port of Spain can produce.

In another picture of the same event, President Carmona, Ms McDonald and Mr Burke stand side-by-side rigid, humourless.

The Prime Minister, who also attended the event, was not part of the picture.

You think to yourself, “What an odd series of pictures.” What was it that caused you to recoil? Could it be the apparent breach of the dress code, or something else? Some time later Burkie is pictured giving an interview poolside at his Sea Lots residence in defence of his decision to attend the ceremony.

What in fact could have been so egregious and distasteful about his minister’s choice of friends that prompted the Prime Minister to go where not even the Integrity Commission could get him to go? Not that we are complaining. What information could the Prime Minister be privy to that would give him the impetus to fire his newly reappointed minister based on an unwanted guest, particularly after going so far out on a political limb to reinstate her? The Prime Minister’s explanation was very clear in a necessarily obfuscating sort of way: “This Government will retain its ability to speak with moral and other authority in its fight against crime and criminality in Trinidad and Tobago, and to do so we will zealously preserve our ability to do so by ensuring that we don’t compromise ourselves in anyway and when I speak on or take actions on this matter suffice it to say that I speak as Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, as head of the Cabinet and chairman of the National Security Council who, more than likely, will have a bit more information than anyone else in Trinidad and Tobago and the decisions I make are decisions against that background.” Good to know