Appeal Court affirms ruling in firearms dealer case

A judge’s displeasure over the State’s failure, on two occasions, to file its evidence in response to interim relief sought by firearms dealer Brent Thomas in a constitutional claim cannot be faulted, the Appeal Court said.

Thomas filed the claim over his prosecution for firearm-related offences

On April 18, Justices of Appeal Vasheist Kokaram and Malcolm Holdip gave their written reasons for dismissing the Attorney General’s appeal on March 27.

In its appeal, the State argued that trial judge Justice Devindra Rampersad was wrong to refuse to grant the extension; failed to take into account significant public-interest facts when ordering the return of Thomas’s receipt books, firearm registers, firearm user's licence, the keys to his business, his mobile phone and his handguns.

Rampersad did not stay in the criminal proceedings against Thomas in the magistrates’ court. His decision in Thomas’s substantive claim has been reserved.

The State had been given two opportunities to file its response in the matter, although its attorneys assured it would be ready long before December 12, when the judge was to give his ruling. At that hearing, the State asked for another extension, but the judge was of the view it was “too little too late” and gave his ruling.

Kokaram, who delivered the written decision, said judicial time was spent preparing for the hearing and the State’s actions was
“discourteous to the court.”

He also dismissed the complaint that the judge failed to consider public-interest factors and the cross-contamination argument. It was the AG’s contention that the order for the return of the items was incapable of enforcement since it exposed the Attorney General to “cross-contamination” of the Constitution by being asked to “interfere with the independent operations of the police service and the prosecution of crime.”

But Kokaram said the orders were effective against the Attorney General and there was no risk of cross-contamination of the separate constitutional roles of the AG, the DPP or the police.

Kokaram said the judge correctly and fairly exercised his case-management powers and also weighed where the risk of harm lay, based on the unchallenged evidence he had before him.

Thomas, the owner of Specialist Shooters Training Centre, was first arrested on September 29, 2022, and later released. He was re-arrested in Barbados, from where he intended to travel to Miami to meet his cardiologist, and said he was forcibly returned to Trinidad. He was later charged with possession of a series of weapons, including grenades and rifles.

In his constitutional motion, he challenged his detention and the procurement of search warrants for his home and his dealership. He is on $800,000 bail.

Kokaram said there was evidence of irreparable harm before the judge relating to the devastating impact the police’s raid had on Thomas’s business and his physical and mental suffering if the interim relief was not granted. He also said there was evidence that ordering the return of some items would not have prejudiced the police’s prosecution, since there were no charges related to those items.

Thomas has argued that for every weapon that he was charged for, he had permits issued and signed by the commissioner.

He also contends that for two decades, his company has supplied guns, ammunition and other services to the State, including the police, defence force and prison, and therefore his possession of certain weapons was not a secret to the police.

Thomas is represented by attorneys Fyard Hosein, SC, Devesh Maharaj, Sasha Bridgemohansingh and Cheyenne Lugo. Gilbert Peterson, SC, Vanessa Gopaul, Svetlana Dass, Lianne Thomas and Adana Hosang appeared for the AG.