DPP appeals indecent exposure not guilty verdict against Opposition MP

Less than a month after a Georgetown Magistrate found former Government Minister David Patterson not guilty of indecent exposure for allegedly urinating against a fence in the public, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Shalimar Ali-Hack has appealed the decision of the Magistrates’ Court.

The DPP wants the decision of Magistrate Dylon Bess to be set aside and reversed and also wants the Opposition Member of Parliament and former Minister David Patterson to be made to stand costs of the appeal.

On the 1st February, Magistrate Dylon Bess dismissed the charges against Patterson over the lack of sufficient evidence tying Patterson to the allegations laid out before him.

During the trial, the virtual complainant was called upon to provide evidence, after he claimed to have observed the accused exposing himself while urinating against a fence. However, under cross-examination, the man was unable to provide any details about the alleged offence and admitted that he looked away from the person who was allegedly urinating.

The video evidence which was offered during the trial revealed that the person’s back was turned away from the complainant. The video recording also provided no clear image of the person urinating at the fence.

With regard to the audio from the video, the Court found that there was loud music and traffic in the area at the time, and the audio was unhelpful in establishing whether obscene language was used.

The charges were completely dismissed by the Court.

MP Patterson was represented by Attorneys Nigel Hughes and Ronald Daniels.

The charges were filed against the former Government Minister, after a man complained to the Police that while attending an event in his neighbourhood, Mr. Patterson walked across the road and relieved himself against a fence. The man claimed when he objected, foul language was directed towards him.