309 / 494
308
Adverse Comments re: Sgt. Mario Pratt
10.104.
On 21 March 2016, the Commission referred drafts of paras.10.58
to 10.68 as “proposed adverse comments” to Sgt. Mario Pratt for his response
thereto in accordance with the provisions of the 2013 amendments to the
Commissions of Enquiry Act. Sgt. Pratt responded on 5 April 2016. His response
appears at Appendix AC8 of this Report.
Summary of Response by Sgt. Pratt
10.105.
(i)
It is unreasonable to take issue with his credibility while
finding witnesses for the JDF credible.
(ii)
He had not gone to Tivoli Gardens before 24 May and was
unfamiliar with the area.
(iii)
He saw Cons. Maxwell making notes on 25 May. 27 bodies
were collected.
(iv)
Based on the operational plan, more could have been done
by persons responsible for investigations.
(v)
The fact that the records of KPH do not show that 2 bodies
were taken there on 24 May, cannot determine the
credibility of DSP Tabannah and Sgt. Waugh. He (Sgt. Pratt)
was not served with a copy of the KPH records.
(vi)
We have disregarded his testimony because we failed to
assess the evidence properly.
(vii)
The team of which he was a part came under sustained
gunfire for 2 hours.
Commission’s Comments and Findings
10.106.
There is nothing in Sgt. Pratt’s response that persuades us
to change our findings. Sgt. Pratt persists in the belief that
Sgt. Waugh’s oral evidence of taking 2 bodies to KPH on 24 May and