RBSC

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DPP wants RM Pusey removed from Kern case

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DPP wants RM Pusey removed from Kern case

    ANOTHER stay has been placed on the delay-plagued corruption trial of former junior energy minister Kern Spencer and his co-accused Coleen Wright.
    Supreme Court judge Justice Horace Marsh yesterday afternoon granted a stay of the proceedings following an application by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Paula Llewellyn.
    Llewellyn applied for the stay after Senior Corporate Area Magistrate Judith Pusey yesterday morning refused to hear an application by Llewellyn, asking her to recuse herself from presiding over the trial.
    The application asking Pusey to recuse was made on the grounds of perceived bias.

    "The learned trial judge, in the conduct of this matter, has demonstrated an apparent bias and falls within the category of disqualification by conduct. The impugned conduct includes language and posture against the prosecution and its agents," the application stated.
    "Such language and posture have effectively caused a stay of the prosecution's case for a period of seven months and prevented it from proceeding," the application continued.
    If Llewellyn is successful in having Pusey removed, the case will have to start over before another magistrate.

    According to the Supreme Court order, the trial should be stayed until November 24. This order also affects a ruling that is supposed to be made by Pusey on Monday as to whether or not the corruption trial should be thrown out on the basis of abuse of process.
    Justice Marsh has also ordered that Llewellyn serve all documents pertaining to the recuse application on Pusey "on or before November 17 for a November 25 hearing on the matter".

    The charges against Spencer and Wright stem from the handling of millions of energy-saving bulbs, a gift from the Cuban Government that ended up costing the Jamaican taxpayers millions of dollars to distribute. The prosecution has alleged that suspects used proceeds from the project for their own benefit.
    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

  • #2
    Based on the reports from various media houses, it certainly appears that the judge acting is a biased manner. Since this case started only 3 witnesses have taken the stand?
    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

    Comment


    • #3
      and what about the DPP meeting with the accused?


      BLACK LIVES MATTER

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mosiah View Post
        and what about the DPP meeting with the accused?
        Something is wrong with that? If so, I wasn't aware of that. Gamma, can you please step in here?

        The "accused" has audio evidence that proves who the mastermind is in this case ... why waste time trying someone when there is evidence proving otherwise?
        "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Lazie View Post
          Something is wrong with that? If so, I wasn't aware of that. Gamma, can you please step in here?

          The "accused" has audio evidence that proves who the mastermind is in this case ... why waste time trying someone when there is evidence proving otherwise?
          your entire response, line for line, is nonsensical and ignorant!


          BLACK LIVES MATTER

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mosiah View Post
            your entire response, line for line, is nonsensical and ignorant!
            If you say suh!
            "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

            Comment


            • #7
              you mean the accused who is giving state's evidence?

              Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. Thomas Paine

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Gamma View Post
                you mean the accused who is giving state's evidence?
                Same one.
                "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                Comment


                • #9
                  well, there is nothing unusual about the DPP meeting with or interviewing their witnesses. the issue seems to be that she misrepresented having met and some issues about her notes. if he had a lawyer and the lawyer was not present then i think such a meeting would be improper.

                  Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. Thomas Paine

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Gamma View Post
                    well, there is nothing unusual about the DPP meeting with or interviewing their witnesses. the issue seems to be that she misrepresented having met and some issues about her notes. if he had a lawyer and the lawyer was not present then i think such a meeting would be improper.
                    Okay ... thanks. Now in your expert opinion, is that sufficient to throw out the case? Secondly, is it the norm for one side to be ordered ... no "suggested" to turn over their "notes" to the other side? I know that all evidence have to be turned over, but notes?
                    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      i'm not an expert on criminal law....in my opinion if the meeting is an improper meeting (as i describe above)... it would raise an element of credibility regarding that witness especially in a plea bargain scenario . that is highly prejudicial ... the case could go on and the judge could do one of 2 things.....exclude that witness or instruct her herself on the credibility issue and take it into account when cosidering the evidence.

                      Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. Thomas Paine

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Gamma View Post
                        i'm not an expert on criminal law....in my opinion if the meeting is an improper meeting (as i describe above)... it would raise an element of credibility regarding that witness especially in a plea bargain scenario . that is highly prejudicial ... the case could go on and the judge could do one of 2 things.....exclude that witness or instruct her herself on the credibility issue and take it into account when cosidering the evidence.

                        Thanks for the explanation. Better mi talk to you cause the eMOtional one hanging wid Don1 a bit too much. Maybe him need fi change him name to Don2.
                        "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Lazie View Post
                          Thanks for the explanation. Better mi talk to you cause the eMOtional one hanging wid Don1 a bit too much. Maybe him need fi change him name to Don2.
                          I know yuh feel stupid because you were hoping that Gamma would help your cause. He clearly didn't so I understand you raising the emotional argument to wipe the egg off yuh face!


                          BLACK LIVES MATTER

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mosiah View Post
                            I know yuh feel stupid because you were hoping that Gamma would help your cause. He clearly didn't so I understand you raising the emotional argument to wipe the egg off yuh face!
                            Easy yuhself eMotional one. If yuh gonna have a serious discussion feel free if not, yuh can find Don1 in another thread.

                            "...in my opinion if the meeting is an improper meeting (as i describe above)... it would raise an element of credibility regarding that witness especially in a plea bargain scenario . that is highly prejudicial ... the case could go on and the judge could do one of 2 things.....exclude that witness or instruct her herself on the credibility issue and take it into account when cosidering the evidence." (Gamma)

                            Based on the above opinion, the case could have moved forward, yet after 7 months only 3 witnesses have taken the stand? The DPP's claim of apparent bias may have some strong argument.
                            "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Gamma View Post
                              you mean the accused who is giving state's evidence?
                              At least one story I read seems to suggest that it was irregular for the DPP to be meeting with an arrested accused person and then using that person as state witness against his former co-defendants?

                              The impression I got was it would it would be wrong to say to such an accused, "tell lie pon yuh co-accused bwoy. mek mi sen im a jail an yuh free"? i.e. become state witness against Kern and Coleen an yuh free?!

                              -----------

                              Let's say Lazie is correct and the cell-phone had evidence that would incriminate Kern and Coleen...why not use the cell-phone and hit the owner with lesser chargers as to his role in the 'scheme'?

                              Why give that person/pay with with 'no-charge' on the fullfilling of a request of giving of evidence against Kern and Coleen? Makes sense?

                              I do not know!
                              Last edited by Karl; November 11, 2010, 05:06 PM.
                              "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X