A self-employed man and his wife will receive over $.5 million in compensation for their arrest and prosecution by police, deemed “devoid of logic” by a High Court judge.

“These events appear to have been that of pure abuse of power by the police who took it upon themselves to forcefully enter the house without lawful authority only to attempt to justify the entry by the telling of untruths later on,” Justice Ricky Rahim said in his ruling in favour of Kevin and Natalia Barrow on October 1.

He also said he believed the police fabricated evidence against the couple.

Attorney Abdel Mohammed represented the Barrows.

The Barrows filed their lawsuit after police and soldiers kicked down the back door to their home on May 25, 2016, and arrested Kevin. He was released the next day without a charge.

On May 27, 2016, while Natalia, who was a pregnant student nurse at the time, was preparing to make a complaint to the Police Complaints Authority (PCA), the police returned to their home and searched it. At first, nothing illegal was found but then the police re-entered with a dog, after which they declared they had found something.

[caption id="attachment_1112203" align="alignnone" width="684"] Attorney Abdel Mohammed -[/caption]

Natalia accused the officers of “planting something in the house,” and she and her husband were taken to the police station and put in adjacent cells. Natalia had to be taken to hospital after falling ill. They were charged with possession of marijuana and granted bail.

The case against them was eventually dismissed in April 2018, because the police failed to attend court,

Rahim said he did not believe the police’s claim that they had information Kevin was selling drugs at his home and criticised a “poorly orchestrated attempt” by officers to introduce “false evidence” of surveillance.

He was also critical of the “most glaring evidence” of the absence of a search warrant not produced at the trial before him.

“This is an entirely odd occurrence and tells the court simply that there was no warrant, hence one could not be produced. It was all made up.

“But there is more…The credibility of the police in this case is, in the court’s view, tainted by obvious untruths and their evidence cannot be trusted on the material issues.

“The chain of events clearly demonstrates to the court that the police appeared to be motivated by ill will and spite towards the claimants.”

On the couple’s claim of malice, Rahim said the police returned to their home “en masse” after Natalia made it known she was going to the PCA to complain of their conduct and “not only do the facts of the lack of reasonable and probable cause amount to malice in this case by its very nature of fabrication of evidence but that the surrounding circumstances tell a sordid tale of actual malice on the part of the police by way of inference.”

He added, “It is clear to the court that the police abused their power on each occasion and were high-handed. The actions displayed disregard the sanctity of the rule of law and th