Prosecutors praised by senior attorney

Senior criminal attorney Israel Khan,SC, has commended the two prosecutors who disclosed to the court, a conversation with one of the State’s main witness in a murder case which led to a High Court judge quashing the indictment against three men, and another judge ordering them free.

Khan said in his 40 years’ of practice at the criminal bar, it was the first time that State attorneys revealed that a witness for the State, who implicated the accused on a murder indictment, admitted, behind closed doors, that he lied and was prepared to tell that lie to a judge and jury at trial.

“I am extremely proud of the two young attorneys, Krishna Jaglal and Shabaana Shah, who possessed the moral and spiritual values, to stand up for justice,” Khan said.

On Monday, a decade after they were charged, Chris Durham, Ian Sandy and Deon Calliste, were freed after Justice Avason Quinlan-Williams quashed the indictments against them.

She ruled that the failure of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to “forthwith discontinue” prosecution against the three was “unreasonable, improper and unfair.”

The three were charged with the murders of Mentie Murai, Mubarak Z. Calder and Kevon St Louis which were alleged to have occurred on April 21, 2009.

Quinlan-Williams’ ruling came after the three filed a judicial review claim after it was revealed that the prosecutors in the case raised with the judge “serious concerns they had about the legality, fairness and lawfulness of the continuation of the trial against the accused persons,” and disclosed to one of the defence lawyers the serious concerns he (the prosecutor) had arising from a conference they had with the main witness O’Neil Benjamin.

Benjamin told them his statement to police and his evidence at the preliminary inquiry were lies. He said he lied because it “was all part of his plan for the good of the community,” and “he did what he had to do at the time to bring a level of peace in the community of Diego Martin.”

He also told the prosecutors: “You all go ahead and do your work. To work together for the community. Do your job. Ask the questions because your job is to ask questions and to get convictions.”

In her ruling, Quinlan-Williams said it was evident the two prosecutors did what “was necessary to uphold the most noble tenants of the legal profession in general and of prosecutors in particular.”

“Of note are the prosecuting attorneys’ efforts to ensure that they did not offer the evidence, of what they considered, to be a perjured witness. Such offering would have had the effect of eroding confidence in the administration of justice. It would also have placed the two attorneys in conflict with their sworn duties and obligations under the Legal Profession Act, including not to offer the evidence of a perjured witness. We should expect and have confidence that the DPP, will as they declared, apply great care to decisions, especially difficult ones, as our lives and the institution of the administration of justice depend on it,” the judge said.

In commenting on the matter, Khan added, “I am sure that every advocate at the Criminal Bar (both defence and prosecution) is silently asking himself/herself how many persons are rotting in our jails awaiting trials on false evidence.”

The State is expected to appeal the ruling.