State Prosecutor raises concern over omission of “inadmissible” evidence in election fraud trial

State Prosecutor raises concern over omission of “inadmissible” evidence in election fraud trial

The electoral fraud trial came to an early end today as the Prosecution raised repeated concerns over the omission of certain pieces of “evidence” that were deemed to be inadmissible by City Magistrate Leron Daly.

As the trial entered its third day, State Prosecutor, Darshan Ramdhani told the Court that it was important to address a number of issues, including the question of admissibility, before the Head of the Diaspora Unit at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Rosalind Rasul returned to the witness box.

Rasul had served as an election observer for AMCHAM during the 2020 Elections, and was expected to continue her testimony today in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court.

Ramdhani, in his lengthy exchange with the Magistrate, argued that the decision by the Court on Tuesday to bar Minister of Local Government Sonia Parag from implicating an agent of the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC), on the grounds that the party agent is not named in the proceedings, could have serious repercussions.

Ramdhani told the Court that other witnesses such as Rasul could face a similar challenge when providing evidence. However, in maintaining her ruling on the issue, Magistrate Daly said the circumstances would determine whether a similar approach is taken.

The Prosecutor cited a number of cases, maintaining that the witnesses should be allowed to testify unimpeded.

“We made some submissions about admissibility of evidence; you would have heard us speak about that. Questions about hearsay evidence, how it is to be used, a man, who says something, whether he is charged, whether that evidence can be used against another defendants, whether that defendant is in his presence or not,” the State Prosecutor explained outside the Court.

Ramdhani also raised the issue of “exclusion” of evidence provided by two witnesses, Parag and Rasul, who have testified thus far. He noted that from time to time, the Magistrate indicated that she had not taken note of certain evidence, and he was under the impression that she was relying on the recording.

But the Magistrate clarified that while the trial is being recorded, evidence deemed to be inadmissible would not be included in her official notes.

In response, Ramdhani expressed concern that the Prosecution may not have been given a chance to respond before any omission is made. He has since asked to review the recording to identify instances when evidence was omitted.

 “There were some other issues discussed in relation to notes of evidence, and what is being excluded. Beyond that I don’t witness to comment any further,” he told reporters.

Attorney-at-Law Darren Wade, who forms part of the battery of the Lawyers representing the nine (9) defendants in the case, asked the Court for an opportunity to respond.

After a brief adjournment, Magistrate Daly indicated that the trial would be adjourned to Monday, August 5, 2024.

The defendants in the matter are former Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield, former Deputy Chief Elections Officer (DCEO) Roxanne Myers and former Region 4 Returning Officer (RO) Clairmont Mingo, along with Member of Parliament, Volda Lawrence; People’s National Congress Reform (PNC/R) Member Carol Smith-Joseph; and Election Officers Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Denise Bobb-Cummings and Michelle Miller. They are facing 19 conspiracy charges relating to an attempt to declare fraudulent results during the course of the 2020 Elections.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login