Six men waiting four years to be tried for murder and attempted murder, will have to wait a little while longer, as their case was adjourned yesterday.
Before the business of jury selection got underway, Justice John Isaacs indicated that he had received a medical certificate from Michael Kemp, one of the lawyers in the case, stating that he had suffered a broken leg.
At that point prosecutor Neil Brathwaite, asked that the matter be adjourned. J Almitra Jones and Anthony Delaney from the Attorney General’s office , assisted him in the matter.
Appearing in court yesterday was Murrio Ducille and Tamara Taylor, representing Derrick Bastian and Neil Prosper. Wille Moss represented Don Bastian and Raymond Hepburn. Wayne Watson represented Jerome Bastian and Mr Kemp’s client is Jeffrey Miller.
These defendants were accused of murdering Peter Clarke and attempting to murder John Moxey on May 12, 2001, at the Traveler Rest club in Mangrove Cay, Andros. The men were charged a few days later and acquitted on Nov. 22, 2001.
The three attorney’s present asked for their matters to be severed from Mr Kemp’s, in order for it to move forward. However, Mr Braithwaite objected to the application, which the court subsequently refused.
Mr Ducille had also made an application to stay the indictment, as he pointed out that the men had previously faced the same charges. Following the preliminary inquiry, the magistrate discharged the six defendants who were then re-arrested and re-charged with the same offences.
The Crown said they would then proceed by way of a voluntary bill of indictment.
In addition, Mr Ducille said that it was an abuse of process because the prosecution had no new evidence available to them, other than what was brought in the magistrate’s court.
Further, he said that there was no evidence to show how the deceased died or that the accused had anything to do with his death. The other attorney’s present, adopted the submissions of Ducille.
Mr Braithwaite told the court that Mr Ducille’s application was not in a proper form before the court and it had to be made by way of summons and affidavits, which were not filed. For that reason, the prosecutor said there was no evidence before the court on which it could act.
He also pointed out that the Criminal Procedure Code provided that a discharge at a preliminary inquiry was not a bar to subsequent proceedings, if the Crown disagreed with the magistrate’s decision. He said that was an option open to the Attorney General, to re-institute the charges and was not an abuse of process.
The court did not accept Mr Ducille’s application and set the matter to October 3, for the determination of a permanent a trial date.
By: JIMENITA SWAIN, The Nassau Guardian
