One bad apple spoils the barrel
THE EDITOR, Madam:
THE JAMAICA Constabulary Force’s (JCF) website says, “We serve, we protect, we reassure with courtesy, integrity and proper respect for the rights of all.” A bad apple is generally understood to refer to someone who creates problems for other people, and whose actions or behaviours negatively influence the larger group of an organisation. The phrase is often interpreted erroneously by implying that a bad apple is not representative of the whole, when, in fact, the term stems from the larger phrase “one bad apple can spoil the barrel,” which suggests that the negativity is not an isolated incident.
According to Aristole, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then is not an act, but a habit.” I’ve been driving for 36 years and would like to think that, as Aristotle put it, I am what I repeatedly do. I am a creature of habit. Over the weekend of June 25, as I made a right turn from Munro Road on to Wellington Drive in Kingston, a policeman stopped me and alleged that I failed and/ or neglected to use my indicator. The policeman was mistaken. At the material time, I did put on the indicator. As a matter of fact, as a defensive-trained driver, I also use my indicators while backing up and making a turn. For example, when reversing into a parking spot.
NOT GUILTY
In the final analysis, the constable wrote a ticket. Interestingly, he didn’t ask me to sign it. On it, he inscribed that I asked for a chance. Hogwash. Again, he was, as is said i n courtroom parlence, ‘mistaken’ (i.e., mendacious). He also wrote that I said that I would go to court. That is not untrue. Of course I would go to court. Although the fine is only $400 on a matter principle, I am willing to attend court, and I said so. I would plead not guilty and voiced that, too. Policemen are notorious for writing tickets and having expectations that, in the interest of time, members of the public will all go and pay the fines or go to court and plead guilty. Not me. The courts are there to hear and air matters, aren’t they?
Perhaps because I ‘ dared’ to ‘protest’, I paid a ‘price’. The constable’s allegation to state something that didn’t go so doesn’t augur well for serving, protecting, reassuring ‘with courtesy, integrity and proper respect for the rights of all’. Arguably, this bad apple could create problems for the JCF. Coupled with what is fed to me by the media and by members of the public about the JCF, negativity doesn’t appear to be isolated here. The policeman’s action has cast a shadow over the organisation. One bad apple can therefore spoil the barrel. It certainly has left a bitter taste in my mouth.
H. JOHNSON