Crown ordered to disclose
(CNS): Following the failure of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to disclose important information to defence attorneys, a mounting number of cases are being delayed in the Grand Court. The crown’s failure on Friday to disclose critical information regarding an arson case by the date of a plea and directions hearing brought the situation to a head and an acting judge issued a court order giving the crown just seven days to disclose critical information and giving the defence lawyer the right to make an application to shut down the case against his client if they failed to respond.
Justice Carol Beswick raised concerns about the issue when she discovered that the lawyer, Nick Hoffman from Priestleys, had been requesting information since May for the hearing and had received nothing from the DPP’s office. This was not the first case for Hoffman, who in the last few weeks has complained to the court on numerous occasions about the prosecution’s failure to disclose or making disclosure at the eleventh hour, hindering and delaying the progression of serious criminal matters. Friday’s case was also one of many others this week held by various local defence attorneys that had to be adjourned because of a lack of documentation to support the criminal charges.
Hoffman told the court that he had been corresponding with the crown asking for the information since May. He said on the 9 August he received an email from a member of the DPP’s office who had said her “hands were tied” but she was sure disclosure would be made to the lawyer before the 14 September hearing. However, Hoffman said that was the last he heard from the crown.
He warned that the trial of Sven Connor for arson, which was set for November, was in jeopardy as the defence still didn’t know the full details of the case, which was not only a problem for the courts and the witnesses and lawyers involved but more so for his client, who remains on remand at Northward.
“I am more than a little concerned,” the judge stated as she pointed to the crown counsel’s reference to her hands being tied as she waited on information from a police officer in the case. “Is it that her hands are tied?” the judge queried as she pressed the crown counsel in court Friday for a plan.
The judge said she could understand the tremendous concerns that the defence had before she issued the court order compelling the crown to disclose, failing which, she said, Hoffman was at liberty to make a suitable application. Hoffman confirmed that he would be seeking to have the case dropped against his client if the information was not forthcoming.
Hoffman was not the only defence attorney seeking disclosure from the crown Friday as numerous cases over the last few weeks have been stalled. A significant number of cases arebacking up in the Grand Court as a result of the failure of the DPP’s office to give the necessary documentation to the defence attorneys of the defendants that they are prosecuting for a catalogue of offences, from murder to rape. There have also been numerous complaints by attorneys that their correspondence to the crown goes unanswered.
Fiona Robinson, who was also struggling to get information for her client who is facing charges of attempted murder, pointed out that “disclosure is a right and not a luxury”, as she asked the crown once again for the details of its case against her client.
Category: Crime
Perhaps it's the police evidence that is not being provided to the DPP that is causing the delays???
Just like a certain recent case where they used forfeiture as leverage to get guilty pleas the Crown and the Police both frequently fly on a wing and a prayer using virtual economic blackmail on defendants of lesser means to get quick and convienent convictions and you have some in the wider community who think its justice until it happens to them our their families. It has been a fact in Cayman and old QC once said to me those who cant afford justice will seldom get here in these islands. Which is a very sad indictment on our so called judicial system. Earlier this year when a local young man facing a single charge had his life marred upon conviction by the courts and another foreign national with means who had three very serious charges walks out of court without having his name even recorded because he had an attitude adjustment after his arrest and charges before the courts was reason for a favorable judgement i wonder just how many locals got that opportunity????
17:13, I think you will find there is a local phenomenon whereby if you are arrested and brought before the courts (for first time oofences), there is ample opportunity (as cases drag on and on in Cayman) to show the judiciary that you have changed or are making serious attempts too, and that you have clearly learnt your lesson.
If you choose that route then the court will sympathise to an extent by providing the accused with a "conviction not recorded" or something similar such as a suspended sentence or community service with a fine etc. so as not to f**k up that said persons life. Now this won't happen with such offences as robbery or murder, moreso when one is caught with "a lickle spliff".
If that said accused goes before the courts, makes no attempt to clean up their act, has no respect for the courts etc, then quite frankly you deserve to go to prison because you choose to do so by not following reccomendatinos to keep your ass out of it.
Take a trip to summary courts, sit there and you will see the difference between those who make efforts to stay out of jail once they are caught and those who couldn't give a rats ass about going to jail.
I think you will find that was the difference in those two cases.
Just sayin.
Have the crown got a case or not, if they have then what's the problem, stop wasting everybodies time, money and resources. If they haven't got a case, common decency must prevail Mr Connor must surely be released?
I don't want to generalise here (and apologise to the decent lawyers out there), but that's the problem with law, the lawyers make things more complicated than they need to be hoping that the side with the least cash will cave in and surrender. Surely it boils down to one very simple question, has this guy committed a crime or not, if the crown has no evidence to support their claim then stop mucking about.
Again and again and again. There is, and always has been, a culture of non-disclosure at the Legal Department. They completely fail to appreciate that the tactic of attempting to ambush the defence costs them more cases than they win.
What you are reading here rather closely mirrors tactics that have been used in the UK by the Crown Prosecution Service. One case went to the Old Bailey in October 2011 with over 170 pieces of evidence still unreleased. Needless to say those involved were acquitted.