Got TIPS or BREAKING NEWS? Please call 1-284-442-8000 direct/can also WhatsApp same number or Email ALL news to:newsvino@outlook.com;                               ads call 1-284-440-6666

RVIPF officers reportedly reject 'intrusive' vetting process

Information reaching our news centre is that officers of the Royal Virgin Islands Police Force (RVIPF) are unhappy with recent changes surrounding the new vetting process currently being undertaken by a United Kingdom (UK) team. Photo: Facebook/RVIPF
President of the Police Welfare Association Sergeant Sean A. McCall is having constant dialogues with all stakeholders to find a resolution or determine their course of action. Photo: VINO/File
President of the Police Welfare Association Sergeant Sean A. McCall is having constant dialogues with all stakeholders to find a resolution or determine their course of action. Photo: VINO/File
Governor Daniel Pruce said a police force that is not subject to proper vetting poses a risk to the security of the Territory. Photo: GIS/File
Governor Daniel Pruce said a police force that is not subject to proper vetting poses a risk to the security of the Territory. Photo: GIS/File
ROAD TOWN, Tortola, VI- Information reaching our news centre is that officers of the Royal Virgin Islands Police Force (RVIPF) are unhappy with recent changes surrounding the new vetting process currently being undertaken by a United Kingdom (UK) team.

In a statement on April 17, 2025, Governor Daniel Pruce said the recommendation to vet all officers of the RVIPF came from the Commission of Inquiry (CoI). 

“I…[have] made the necessary amendments to the Regulations, to get the process underway and engage the Home Office team. These have now been gazetted, and I have signed the agreement with the UK Home Office so that vetting can begin,” he stated. 

The Governor said the vetting of police officers is a standard process, designed to protect and assist professionals doing their job. 

“My objective is to have all serving officers vetted by Autumn,” he said. 

Too intrusive; officers have rejected vetting process

While recommended by the CoI, reports reaching Virgin Islands News Online (VINO) indicate that the process seems to be intrusive. 

Our sources say police officers have been asked to disclose not only their information, but that of those who reside with them. 

“They must disclose their personal information, such as who all live in their household. All bank account information, including their PIN numbers on any bank cards they hold. If they have property, how they [came] by it, personal information and banking information on their spouses, girlfriends, boyfriends, etc.,” VINO was reliably informed. 

Officers of the RVIPF have reportedly rejected this, with Acting Commissioner of Police Jacqueline E. Vanterpool standing by her officers. However, officers are “subject to discipline” if they do not comply. 

VINO was also told that officers are consulting with high-powered attorney Dr Terrance F. Williams to mount an application for an injunction against the process from going forward.

When our news centre reached out to the President of the Police Welfare Association Mr Sean A. McCall, we were told that they would not be commenting at this time as they are “having constant dialogues with all stakeholders to find a resolution or determine our course of action”. 

No vetting means risk to VI’s security- Gov. Pruce

Governor Pruce, in his April 2025 statement, said a police force that is not subject to proper vetting poses a risk to the security of the Territory.

“At that point, for the first time in its history, the Virgin Islands will have a fully vetted police force. This will build trust within the force and between agencies working in partnership with the RVIPF. It will also improve public confidence in the RVIPF.”

The Governor believes the vetting of police officers is a positive step forward for the security of the VI, representing a “significant milestone” in the completion of a relevant CoI recommendation.

VINO was also informed that members of His Majesty’s Prison, Immigration, Customs, and Virgin Islands Fire and Rescue Services will have to undergo similar vetting. 

38 Responses to “RVIPF officers reportedly reject 'intrusive' vetting process”

  • Hottie (08/05/2025, 08:05) Like (8) Dislike (12) Reply
    The disclosure of interests legislation pushed by the last governor required everybody in a position of authority in the BVI to provide extensive disclosure of their assets … except for the Governor!!!
    • @hottie (08/05/2025, 09:41) Like (27) Dislike (2) Reply
      The Governor is a UK civil servant and was vetted by the UK Government. Stay focused.
  • 2024 (08/05/2025, 08:08) Like (4) Dislike (4) Reply
    is the disclosure open to all applicants or simply the West Indians
    • @2024 (09/05/2025, 06:57) Like (6) Dislike (0) Reply
      Why are you trying to imply that the requirement is racist? It is not! All officers whatever race, creed, religion will be subject to vetting.
  • resident (08/05/2025, 08:14) Like (55) Dislike (8) Reply
    what do they have to hide, our cops need to be beyond suspicion and of the highest character
    • @resident (08/05/2025, 09:38) Like (12) Dislike (7) Reply
      Yeah, but you cannot trample on their rights in the process. You will never get a good outcome from a flawed process.
      • resident (08/05/2025, 10:30) Like (36) Dislike (5) Reply
        with great responsibility should come higher scrutiny, if you don't want that then maybe being a cop isn't the job for you
    • Hmmmm (08/05/2025, 13:03) Like (16) Dislike (1) Reply
      It was very appalling to learn that no vetting was done for hiring in such a job. However, it was no surprise because we have some real characters on the force.
  • Asking for friend (08/05/2025, 08:14) Like (15) Dislike (22) Reply
    So how come no one vet these racist governors or their uk staff?
  • james (08/05/2025, 08:22) Like (23) Dislike (33) Reply
    Tell them island peep go back home if they don’t want to. You think that vetting is bad, try having to complete 100 page SF-86 form and then an do an OPM interview about the details of your form to the United States Government. Much much worse. Suck it up.
    • Cinderella slippers (08/05/2025, 11:54) Like (24) Dislike (2) Reply
      Only island peeps in the force? Why should anyone have to give all their account PIN numbers among other info
    • tell the whole story (08/05/2025, 18:04) Like (4) Dislike (0) Reply
      Is that required to apply for a police job? That form is for people dealing with matters of national security.
  • wa (08/05/2025, 08:24) Like (27) Dislike (2) Reply
    That's crazy! Pin numbers? I was dating a police offer that relationship would seize immediately.
  • Guest (08/05/2025, 09:37) Like (48) Dislike (1) Reply
    Vetting is necessary yes, but requiring the PIN?? That one is going overboard.
    I can see disclosing the account number and name of the banking institution but why the PIN in the ordinary course of things. If the officer becomes the subject of an investigation, then there are court orders and mechanisms to facilitate that investigation.
    • Guest 2 (08/05/2025, 10:34) Like (24) Dislike (1) Reply
      This is not accurate. Nowhere on the form, which can be accessed online by all, does it ask for PIN numbers. Why would they ever need that when it can be changed at any ATM anytime anyway?! It asks for bank account numbers and card numbers. Don't believe everything you read on here.
  • Karnage (08/05/2025, 09:39) Like (21) Dislike (6) Reply
    Yet a former Commissioner bought a house and is still here
    • DAH (08/05/2025, 12:55) Like (11) Dislike (1) Reply
      So what if a former commissioner bought a house and is still here? Lots of other police bought or build houses are are still here!
  • math (08/05/2025, 10:02) Like (20) Dislike (0) Reply
    i understand the need cuz big assets with small pay tf but why uk need them bank card pin number? lol you alrdy got their account number and cards attached to that
  • Real Talk (08/05/2025, 10:32) Like (1) Dislike (2) Reply
    MY JESUS THE THING START NOW LOOK MONEY MOVING THE SMOKE IN THE POPE HOUSE IS STILLL BLACK BRACE YOU SELF
  • WOW (08/05/2025, 11:04) Like (22) Dislike (2) Reply
    I can't comprehend this one. I can understand the vetting but this has gone waaaaaay overboard. Why do they need the PIN for the officer's cards? No, no, no. The personal information and banking information on their spouses, girlfriends, boyfriends? This is a serious invasion of privacy and needs to be taken to court ASAP.

    I wish that stupid people like "James" in the comment above would see the issue for what it is and make a meaningful contribution. And by the way, it's not only 'island peep' who are working in the Force.
  • Dave (08/05/2025, 12:13) Like (19) Dislike (0) Reply
    This is BS. I did the vetting a few months ago. They ask standard security questions about close relations just like other jurisdictions. Nobody asked my PIN number.
  • onlooker (08/05/2025, 12:24) Like (21) Dislike (0) Reply
    Give your pin numbers then go in the bank next day and change them. Be smart. Nah I'm not that serious. But to be honest I think I might have a problem with that as well.
  • worst (08/05/2025, 12:27) Like (12) Dislike (1) Reply
    UK police once best in the world is now the WORST, tooooooo WOKE, they dont show up to your house if you are robbed, LITERALLY they just dont show up. BUT if you say something about trans he/her/they/it they come knocking your door down.
  • Tab (08/05/2025, 12:29) Like (8) Dislike (0) Reply
    It should be mandatory for every police officer to go through the vetting process including the UK officers as well. It is a fact that the rvipf has some questionable characters but the majority of the officers are hardworking and respectable. It is important that proper process be put in place to protect the officers personal data.
    Currently, the rvipf has about 8 to 12 officers on suspension and charged for serious offences. Are they going to vetted as well?
  • ok (08/05/2025, 12:55) Like (5) Dislike (0) Reply
    It's simple..this is part of the process.Its s way to finally look into these officers with massive bank accounts on the Government modest salaries..sweat dem a sweat.
  • now? (08/05/2025, 14:07) Like (9) Dislike (0) Reply
    Shouldn't this have been done before they were hired?
  • jack (08/05/2025, 14:46) Like (7) Dislike (0) Reply
    I don't think they are only concerned with their bank accounts. The must also be of good character. Some police officers in the BVI were not gainfully employed in their homeland, and there is a reason for that.
  • good move (08/05/2025, 18:02) Like (2) Dislike (0) Reply
    Community can’t trust the police’s much less … just like how they flip politicians life wide open …

    Officers of the country we need to know them … and their character is clean too ….

    Card PIN is madness doe.
  • Dont forget (08/05/2025, 19:16) Like (5) Dislike (0) Reply
    There have been so many mistakes in employment of some Police officers who have allegedly been part of criminal activities in the past as recent as of 2024. This process is simple and it needs to be done. They ask for a big money which they got. This vetting is simple. The question but by whom? The vetting should include all Law Enforcement.
  • Citizen (08/05/2025, 20:36) Like (6) Dislike (0) Reply
    I am in agreement with the vetting to an extent. But providing my pin numbers on bank cards totally unacceptable. Bank statement can be considered and if there's anything suspicious then further investigation into the funds. But it should not be across the board one size cannot fit all. We must admit we have some shady police but there's also clean honest ones as well. If this is required for police officers it should also be for elected members of parliament .
  • lipstick on a pig (09/05/2025, 10:27) Like (2) Dislike (0) Reply
    Yes , they should be vetted AND personal information given to some extent. All the documents should be published though so that we can see exactly what is stated and or required in the vetting process of the officers. Yes local family members should be scrutinised to some extent because criminal activity is often times hidden in other family members name etc.
  • I am a police (09/05/2025, 10:56) Like (2) Dislike (0) Reply
    We have nothing against the vetting. We tell the acting commissioner to get the issues correct first. She publicly said she is supporting us and we she will. But she also have to follow the governor instructions too. But we still asking for it to be placed on hold u til everything is corrected for we aint backing down. We inten to put the heat on the acting commissioner because she has to listen to we. We done see rhe governor ain’t listening to nobody. He doing whatever he want and rhe government fast asleep. But we ain’t sleep. They must get it right. They need to respect we for we have rights too. Jackie VANTERPOOL please stay WOKE.
    • Real Talk (10/05/2025, 06:13) Like (2) Dislike (0) Reply
      If you is a police you should be ashamed of your self no wonder the force in shambles please resign not tommorow now church out.
    • @I am a police (10/05/2025, 06:47) Like (2) Dislike (0) Reply
      See why vetting is truly needed.
    • BRAD BOYNES (11/05/2025, 17:17) Like (1) Dislike (0) Reply
      Do not follow any illegal instruction
  • BRAD BOYNES (09/05/2025, 11:28) Like (1) Dislike (1) Reply
    Lets vet the dam Governor. Vetting officers is an unfair practice and the consent of the Governed comes into play here. If i am on the force 20 yeas of my life what are you vetting me for.
  • Oh Well (09/05/2025, 15:40) Like (1) Dislike (0) Reply
    Worrying? guess you have something dark in your past
  • smh (10/05/2025, 06:49) Like (1) Dislike (1) Reply
    Based on some of these comments, Reading is fundamental and understanding what is being read is comprehensive.


Create a comment


Create a comment

Disclaimer: Virgin Islands News Online (VINO) welcomes your thoughts, feedback, views, bloggs and opinions. However, by posting a blogg you are agreeing to post comments or bloggs that are relevant to the topic, and that are not defamatory, liable, obscene, racist, abusive, sexist, anti-Semitic, threatening, hateful or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be excluded permanently from making contributions. Please view our declaimer above this article. We thank you in advance for complying with VINO's policy.

Follow Us On

Disclaimer: All comments posted on Virgin Islands News Online (VINO) are the sole views and opinions of the commentators and or bloggers and do not in anyway represent the views and opinions of the Board of Directors, Management and Staff of Virgin Islands News Online and its parent company.