San Fernando couple accused of beating JP win appeal

A San Fernando couple who were charged with assaulting a justice of the peace in 2017 at their store have successfully argued their appeal against their convictions and fines.

During a hearing of San Fernando magisterial appeals, Appeal Court judges Justice Prakash Moosai and Gillian Lucky upheld the appeal and set aside the convictions and the fines imposed on them.

They did not order a retrial.

Rabindranath Maharaj, 65, and his wife Zairoon, 60, owners of R&J Cell Tech mobile store at Gulf City Mall, La Romaine, appealed their convictions for beating a justice of the peace on February 24, 2017. The couple had been fined $200 each and ordered to pay varying sums of compensation to their alleged victim.

It was alleged the JP went to the couple’s store with friends to buy cellphones but did not have enough money. He offered to use his credit card and after being told there would be an additional cost for using it, he declined to complete the purchase.

It was alleged when he was leaving the store, he was pulled back and called a “thief and robber.” He claimed the couple beat him on the head.

The couple’s attorneys, Wayne Sturge and Danielle Rampersad, argued that the magistrate, in finding the couple guilty, engaged in conjecture and speculation when she assessed the evidence. They argued this shifted the burden of proof to the couple, while also penalising them for not giving evidence.

The attorneys also argued the magistrate wrongfully placed weight on the fact that the alleged victim was a justice of the peace, pastor and mediator, making out he was a more credible witness.

They argued in the couple’s defence that there was no beating and the JP exaggerated what took place at the store.

It was their defence that there was a dispute about payment. This, they said, was even accepted by the JP. Sturge said they acted in a manner to stop an alleged thief from leaving their store.

He said by shifting the burden of proof and failing to address the justification for the couple’s actions, the magistrate speculated on what took place.

He also said by recognising the alleged victim as a person of previous good character, she “enhanced” his credibility.

In an oral ruling, the judges agreed the magistrate erred. Moosai said it was clear the case turned on the issue of credibility, and this was “enhanced” and tipped in favour of the JP. He also said the magistrate’s finding an absence of a motive for exaggerating what took place didn't mean the JP was speaking the truth.

Moosai said the magistrate by misdirecting herself, fell into error.

The judges also decided not to order a retrial, but emphasised the importance of good customer relations. Moosai said this entailed an enhanced respect for each other –customer and owner. The judges, who said they will issue a written decision soon, also said there were avenues for disgruntled customers and business owners without either resorting to violence.

The State was represented by deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Tricia Hudlin-Cooper at the appeal.