202 / 494
201
and in firm control due to the dynamic nature of the
operation.”
8.117.
He said that the searches paid off in a significant way, “as my
Engineers used their knowledge of buildings and construction to identify places
where weapons and ammunition could be hidden. These included but were not
limited to behind false walls etc.” He then mentioned the types of things
recovered, and which have been dealt with under ToR (M) in Chapter 5.
8.118.
During the course of his oral evidence, Lt. Col. Cummings said that
where the Engineers disturbed premises, they sent teams to effect repairs. He
said, in respect of his personal visits to properties:
“I saw no wanton destruction of property. There were cases
where residents complained of damage to property but it
was difficult to determine the time when damage occurred.
I am specifically dealing with damage caused in the course
of searches.”
8.119.
Under cross-examination by Mrs. Mayhew, Lt. Col. Cummings said
that the only complaints in Tivoli Gardens were related to damage to property.
As to the
modus operandi
of the Engineers, he said:
“Where a house was locked, we made enquiries about the
owner. In some instances, we had to gain entry under the
powers in the 2007 Emergency Regulations. Grills may have
been sawn off. I saw houses where it appeared that they
were searched before and were in a state of disarray. None
of the residents complained that they were searched before
or that the security forces had been there already. If my
men had reasonable suspicion that a weapon or ammunition
was concealed, they would search. A record was made of
where each weapon or ammunition was found and they
were handed over to the JCF... I did see some damage. The
actions of my soldiers should not have led to destruction of
appliances. They should not have been destroyed as a
result of the searches of my soldiers. I saw blood in some