10 / 494
9
circumstances surrounding those losses assist in revealing the
truth. There were certain difficulties that presented themselves.
We sensed a certain reluctance among some witnesses to take
responsibility for their acts or omissions. There was an obvious
fear of culpability. Our capacity to investigate all circumstances
was sometimes limited not least by an unavailability of information.
We recognised that some persons embellished their evidence in the
hope, for instance, of greater compensation than was warranted by
the damage to their properties. Above all else, an apparent code
of silence among both the residents of West Kingston and some
members of the security forces bore directly on our search for the
truth. At a different level, an absence of critical expert ballistic and
forensic evidence and analysis was an impediment. Nevertheless,
we were able to resolve some of these problems, but others may
have left their mark on this Report. Because of certain findings
which we make however, this Report is not necessarily the last
word on some of the matters which we were required to
investigate. It need not be the end of the search for the truth.
(ii)
Participation.
We sought to facilitate the freest expressions of the
voices of all parties who were, in various ways, involved in the
events of May 2010, most of all, the voices of residents and
victims. We saw it as our duty to ensure that they were
encouraged to vent their experiences. We granted standing to
appear before the Commission to persons and organisations
besides the security forces in order to afford an opportunity for
participation by diverse interests.
(iii) Openness.
Issues related to the security of the State are often
shielded from public scrutiny. Such practices conduce to a deficit in
public trust of the institutions or agencies responsible for the