.png)
'Newton hearing' in Tambu Frett case as Crown & Defense reach stalemate
Mr Frett, through his lawyer, Mr E. Leroy Jones, argued in his initial mitigation at a previous court appearance that his client was only assisting a friend and it was not done for money.
The Crown; however, said a 26-page document produced by police late into the case indicate that phone records implicate Mr Frett as part of a smuggling operation and was paid for his smuggling jobs.
Disagreement over admission of report
In court held via Zoom today, May 1, 2020, Mr Jones at first argued that the report could not be admissible at the sentencing stage since his client had already pleaded guilty to the charges unknowing of that report and accused the Crown of trying to hijack the sentencing hearing.
“My Lady it must be made absolutely clear that the document produced and submitted to this honourable court by the Crown on the day of sentencing must be considered to be inadmissible. It cannot and must not be allowed to enter into this proceeding at this stage,” Mr Jones argued.
Crown counsel and Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Ms Tiffany R. Scatliffe-Esprit told the court; however, there was “nothing improper” with bringing new evidence once a sentencing had not been handed down as yet.
Senior Magistrate Tamia N. Richards noted that she has read the new 26-page report “from cover to cover” and it becomes relevant to the court because it reads contrary to the defence’s mitigation, “that he, Mr Frett, is actually part of a smuggling ring and they [police] took voice notes from his phone and WhatsApp messages showing the organisation and movement of persons illegally between St John, USVI and the BVI and back and forth” and that Mr Frett did it for pay.
She said it was now not a matter of Mr Frett’s guilt as he has already pleaded guilty but, with the report, it now becomes an issue of how guilty is the defendant since the evidence in the report would aggravate the sentence.
The defence; however, expressed that it was willing for the case to be over with but could not accept what is stated in the report against Mr Frett, stating that there would have to be a separate case to deal with that report.
'Crown is not going to back down'
The prosecution was then asked if it was willing to withdraw the report or to proceed to have a Newton hearing as to what the facts are in relation to Mr Frett’s “culpability.”
“We are going to have a Newtown hearing because the Crown is not going to back down on this at all,” Ms Scatliffe-Esprit responded.
According to Thomson Reuters Practical Law, a Newton hearing is a short hearing held before a judge or magistrate without a jury present, which is generally held to resolve serious factual issues between the prosecution and defence that could affect sentencing in the subsequent trial.
At the hearing, the sitting judge or magistrates will hear evidence from both parties and make findings of fact on which any sentencing will be based.
The Newton hearing in the Magistrate’s Court is set for Thursday, May 7, 2020, via remote technology if possible, Magistrate Richards concluded.
She said the police officer who submitted the report will be called to give evidence and the defense will then get a chance to cross-examine the witness.
The defendant will also be allowed to testify if he so chooses.
Sentencing delays
Mr Frett, along with an already sentenced Bryan D. Bolan, was found entering the Virgin Islands while the borders were closed and a curfew in place on Friday, April 3, 2020.
He had pleaded guilty on April 6, 2020, but sentencing was delayed to allow for him to be quarantined.
Sentencing was further delayed on April 23, 2020, to allow the defense and crown to properly face the issue of the new information that Mr Frett was part of a smuggling ring.
Sentencing was set for April 30, 2020, but adjourned to May 1, 2020, to allow the defense to submit to the court its references to authorities presented in mitigation.
After the decision was made to have the Newton hearing, Mr Frett, through his attorney, said he was willing to get on with the sentencing and not waste any more of the court's time; however, when asked by the Magistrate if he was accepting what is in the 'report', including about him being in a smuggling ring and profiting from the illegal acts, Mr Frett declined acceptance.
.jpg)
.png)
Follow Us On
15 Responses to “'Newton hearing' in Tambu Frett case as Crown & Defense reach stalemate”
That is a very good point,the dpp and magistrate taking this case too far like a trial.the man plead guilty to one charge of smuggling and now want to come bring evidence of other incident of smuggling.they will mess up this case,and he will get away.they getting to personal with that case,about from here talk and safe guarding island foolishness.
It could be because of sickness, illness, resignation, dismissal etc...
Legal team say that to say,that justice must not only be done but manifestly seen to be done.
Legal team believe in the criminal justice system,and any person who is convicted of a crime,should be prepared to face the consequencies of his crime.he must be prepared to face justice,in a free and democratic society.
If you do the crime,you must do the time.I support that saying.
But, enforcers of laws,or administrators of justice,should not make it too obvious,on dispensing justice,with a feeling of "I got you now".
Once a man,twice and child: Once a person with authority-twice a member of the public.
I live my life every day remembering that. Legal team will not even give an opinion on what was published.Something is not right.
Let justice reign in the BVI.
you cant deport anybody right now from the bvi,corona virus covid-19 now take over everything to show man on earth that abuse of pwer and authority will never succeed.magistrate and dpp cannot be in court at the same time.we not reading the message of unfairness and impartial.
But here on earth,justice comes from trusted persons in our society.
Be it police, prosecutor, jury, magistrate or judge, you never administer justice based on your inner "PERSONAL" feelings about a person,be he good for society or bad for society.
This is the first time in my legal background, that I have heard of a criminal case, where the defendanr pleaded guilty,on a charge before a court of law. The evidence for that charge was outlined to the court,by the prosecutor-dpp, and the court accepted the facts of the case,and convict the defendant based on the facts before the court, but the prosecution wants to introduce new additional evidence,of previous crimes "ALLEDGEDLY" committed by the accused, "for which he is not charged before the same court"? And want the magistrate to accept that as ADDITIONAL evidence of the case before the court? ["NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY COVID-19 IS A MESSAGE TO ALL SINNERS"]
People in authority,be carefull how you use that authority,TO ACHIEVE unlawfull practices,to take advantage of the criminal justice system.
This practice is an attack on the criminal justice system all over the world.
One day, we might be on the other side of the law, [IN THE DEFENDANTS' BOX] you never know, because I see police officers etc,,go to prison:If you get charge for a crime, you would want justice to be render,to you the same way of fairness.
[" IF YOU DO THE CRIME,YOU MUST DO THE TIME"] That's what the criminal justice system is about.
How can you introduce evidence outside the charge before the court, to prejudice the mind of the court?
An absolute travesty of justice!!