Turks & Caicos Islands actively seeking criminals to be police officers

Have a criminal record? Want a career as a police officer? Head for the Turks & Caicos Islands!

The Royal Turks & Caicos Islands Police is actively seeking criminals to become police officers, this according to our friends over at TCeyeNow blog. We checked with the TCI police website and sure enough, yup… the police force is looking for criminals to become police officers.

“Previous criminal convictions, which must be disclosed, will not necessarily prevent appointment (as a police officer).”

… from the recruiting section of the Royal Turks & Caicos Islands Police

Will wonders never cease? Are things that tough in the recruitment department?

“Any reasonable person would think that the Commissioner of police and his Deputy would be working overtime to restructure the police force, change the recruiting policy and root out the criminal elements in the police force.

Instead the Police force is appealing for more criminals to join the police force.”

from the TCeyeNow article TCI Police Force actively seeking criminals to join the force

And in Barbados…

As a followup in a telephone call to the Royal Barbados Police Force, a recruitment officer told Barbados Free Press that it would be ‘unlikely’ that the organisation would hire anyone with a criminal record to be a police constable but that we were welcome to submit an application. That sounds okay until you stop to consider that there is no blanket prohibition against hiring persons with criminal records.

Standards: If society doesn’t maintain them it all goes to hell.


Filed under Barbados, Crime & Law, Police

18 responses to “Turks & Caicos Islands actively seeking criminals to be police officers

  1. Alybaba

    Maybe they need criminals to catch criminals, after all, they know the tricks of the trade…..

  2. x

    “will not necessarily pervent” does not mean that it is a guarantee not does it really mean that they are actively seeking criminals.

    I would ask whether this is a more or less reasonable approach than Barbados’ which disqualifies anyone who has ever smoked pot. That’s kinda naive and probably partly responsible for their inability to field a full compliment.

  3. robert ross

    Thank God the previous commentators see through this nonsense.

  4. robert ross

    @ BFP

    In taking this attitude you leave yourselves wide open on the stance we have congratulated you upon in relation to Raul Garcia.

  5. robert ross

    But on ‘standards’, let’s now talk about bare stomachs in church. That IS a ‘live’ issue.

  6. One who knows

    I have to disagree with Robert Ross: when the police take the time to highlight that a criminal record doesn’t necessarily disqualify, it IS sending a message to those with criminal records that you might meet our standard.

    It is disgusting that the Police would consider people with criminal records!

    Mr. Ross, respectfully sir, you and the others are wrong. The police are specifically delivering a message to criminals. Things must be very tough in recruitment for them to lower the standard this much. Police should be the best paid civil servants so there is no excuse for corruption.

    The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour. Always has been, always will be. The police should not be considering persons with a criminal record, because the truth is that for every conviction on a criminal’s record, there is probably 25 or 100 crimes.

    Robert Ross, you are wrong, sir.

  7. robert ross

    LOL…..behind every first offender there are 25-100 offences…..yes, well. Perhaps I might suggest that you’re input might go down very well on BU. I’m sure some would love you.

  8. M

    I am a retired police officer. Every felon I every arrested for the first offence always got caught doing the first crime. What crap!

    We would catch someone breaking into a house and fingerprinting would show he did 30 jobs before we got him, but in court the prosecutor would allow him to plead to a single B&E break and enter, and the defence lawyer would stand up and say he had no prior convictions and he would walk with a warning.

    One who knows is correct to say “The police should not be considering persons with a criminal record, because the truth is that for every conviction on a criminal’s record, there is probably 25 or 100 crimes.”

  9. robert ross

    Yes M..there’s a lot of it about – crap. It certainly is the silly season. When did you last filch a paper clip?

  10. robert ross

    We have 25 crimes…..any advance on 25?…..25…25…do I hear 100? Yes, thankyou. On my right. Now any advance on 100? Do I hear 150? I’m waiting gentlemen….150?…….

  11. cq9

    robert ross’ point is that every criminal gets arrested whilst committing their first crime. He’s wrong, but that is his point.


  12. robert ross


    Oh dear…play your games boys elsewhere.

    At NO POINT did I say that.

    Haven’t you anything better to do? For Christ’s sake – get a life.

  13. La Bouche

    Don’t even trouble yourself. These people are either mad, F…n stupid or just plain trouble. Let them showoff their BRAINS somewhere esle. Maybe at Kent Construction.

    Equal oppurtunity is not activitly seeking criminals. This post is rubbish.

  14. WSD

    Equal opportunity for convicted criminals to be a police officer? What stupidity on the part of the police force and the politicians who supposedly represent the public’s interest.

    I agree with the writer of this article though that by mentioning that having a criminal record doesn’t disqualify, that the police force is seeking criminals.

    Suppose they mentioned “Being a member of the Nazi party is not a disqualification” there would and should be an uproar and people would agree they were looking for Nazis. Otherwise why would they mention it?

    Therefore I agree with BFP in this issue.

  15. robert ross

    @ La Bouche


    @ WSD

    On being a member of the Nazi party.

    Interestingly, in the UK the Church of England has made it clear that it will not take on priests who are members of various right wing political organisations – eg the British National Party, whom they regard as racist. I suppose the difference is that whereas the one (membership), is ultimately a state of mind (and one not ‘politically correct’), the other (previous conviction) is linked to the idea that a man has ‘paid the price’ so that provided he declares his previous conviction(s) he now ‘walks’ on a level playing field. Or – to put it another way – the arms of Jesus are always open arms – no-one, not even the Pharisee is excluded and most certainly not the adulteress, The ‘message’ is ‘COME’ not ‘GO’.

  16. Telling it

    There is no doubt in my mind that there are policemen who were and/or are criminals before joining the force but they just have not been either caught or charged therefore their names aren’t listed in the registry of felons.

    Marijuana should have a low value when compared to burglary, murder and even perjury. To me what should be taken into consideration is the level of crime committed.

    Having a known criminal hired as a police, at least you know what you have (LOL) as oppose to those who are wolves in sheep clothing.

    In all seriousness, the world has turned topsy turvy and people minds have become warp and they lost the pride they once was so proud of

    Whether its an organization or an individual, people have to do what they have to do whether it would be favorable or not

  17. St George's Dragon

    I am not sure it is right to be so definitive about potential officers being conviction-free, especially as we are so short of applicants.
    Barbados has to make its own decisions but it is sometimes interesting to see what other countries do.
    In the UK, having some convictions may be acceptable depending on “an applicant’s age at the time of an offence, the length of time and the
    aggravating circumstances surrounding the offence”. Offences which might be accepted are:
    • Drunk and Disorderly – no more than one offence and only after two years have elapsed following a caution or three years have elapsed following a conviction;
    • Minor drugs offences or substance abuse – no more than one offence and only after two years have elapsed following a caution or two years from conviction;
    • Common Assault – no more than one offence as a juvenile and only after two years have elapsed from end of conviction.
    Somehow, I can’t see the upper echelons of the Police or the politicians taking this route, though.

  18. John Q Public

    actually the Turks and Caicos police force have officers who have committed criminal offences. Some of the offences were before the persons became officers and some were committed after becoming officers. The policy ingrained in Turks Islanders heads is no matter what it’s their country so they can do whatever they want and work wherever they want and they can’t be turned down for a job. This is first hand knowledge, not heresay or speculation. I have experienced it. Turks Island police force is very corrupt with about 70% of the members taking bribes, kickbacks and other offerings from the public.Again i have seen this first hand.