Case dismissed against 3 in multi-million $ matter
However the crown has indicated its intention to appeal this morning’s decision.
It was a heated and intense session in the Magistrate’s Court this morning as the attorney representing the three men - Gerry Freeman, Leon King and Hugh Erickson - challenged the Crown’s position of having the trial not go forward pending the response and outcome of the Court of Appeal as it relates to two notices submitted by the Crown.
Attorney at Law Mr Dane R. Hamilton QC, argued intensely and at length that the Crown was out of place in its attempt to stop the trial at this stage. He said that based on the procedures in law the position taken by the Crown has no base and as such the trial should be allowed to continue.
Hamilton was supported by the other attorneys in the matter Ms Valerie Stephens-Gordon and Patrick Thompson.
In his submission Mr Hamilton said that the Crown is well aware that the Court of Appeal has not acceded to the application.
“The Court of Appeal has not fixed a date for the hearing of any application. So the application is on file that any consideration of such an application ultimately would require representation by the counsel for the other defendants in this matter. That would certainly drive this proceeding over and beyond the 28 of November,” submitted Mr Hamilton.
Magistrate Dr John’s time of serving in the Virgin Islands (VI) comes to an end on November 28, 2014.
Hamilton further stated, “It seems to me that there is a certain callousness in the way in which the prosecution is conducting this matter. I am saying to you your worship do not accede to that request, your honor [has] no obligation to stay the hearing of these complaints unless the Court of Appeal gives you an order stating that this matter is stayed because you have not arrived at a decision. You have neither convicted nor acquitted anyone and that is the only way in which an appeal is operated on a stay of execution.”
Thompson on the other hand was in support adding, “I note that my learned friend Ms Scatliffe in her submission said that the court should give this section a purposive construction. Any purposive construction could never mean that persons would be at liberty to simply just appeal and challenge any decision of any magistrate in any matter.”
After listening intently to the submissions of all the parties involved Magistrate Dr. John ordered that the trial proceed today and it was at that stage Senior Crown Counsel Tiffany Scatliffe rose to her feet and stated that under the instructions of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) she was not prepared to go ahead with the matter.
That statement evidently took the others in the case by surprise and resulted in the Magistrate adjourning court for 20 minutes upon his return indicated that his had no recourse but to dismiss the case against the men.
At that time the DPP had rushed to the court and took up the position that was being led by Ms Scatliffe and reinforced her position but Magistrate John did not budge on his position and informed the DPP that the Crown had already laid its position that she was not going ahead with the matter and as such the case against the men is dismissed.
It was at that stage that the DPP informed the court its intention to appeal the decision to dismiss the case against the men.
On the other side of things the Magistrate made it clear that the dismissal of the case exempted Mr James Telesford John who had pleaded guilty earlier in the trial. John is to be sentenced on Friday November 7, 2014.
Jomo Jack was also excluded from today’s decision owing to the fact that he was given a separate date as his lawyer was not available to appear today.
.png)
Follow Us On
34 Responses to “Case dismissed against 3 in multi-million $ matter”
What??? These guys are dangerous. We can't turn to anyone legally now. They are locking up our children for a little weed, and the big multi million dollar drug dealers go free? WTF is this? Who got p..d off?????
Couldn't agree with you more