Some insight on matters that are being discharged and dismissed

Jun 13, 2021 Court Stories, News

---

By Renay Sambach
Kaieteur News-Often times when the media report on a matter being dismissed or discharged by a Magistrate, persons take to social media to express their dissatisfaction in the ruling.
In handing down their ruling, Magistrates would note their findings of the evidence that was presented to the court and take into consideration whatever submission is made by the defence.
A matter being dismissed is not the same as a matter being discharged and in this article, I will highlight the difference between the two and point out some reasons why matters are dismissed or discharged.
DISMISS
At the Magistracy level, matters that are tried summarily can be dismissed. A dismissal of a matter means the case has come to an end with the court finding no guilt and no conviction for the defendant(s) in that case. However, it should be noted that a dismissed case would still remain on the defendant’s criminal record.
DISCHARGE

 

Murder matters are laid indictably and commence at the Magistracy level. However, a Magistrate is not allowed to dismiss a murder matter, but can only discharge a murder matter.
Most persons often mistake the matter being discharged and the matter being dismissed. It should be noted that for murder, which is a serious offence, being discharged against someone is not an acquittal. A murder matter discharged against someone can be brought again with new evidence; against the accused of the same alleged offence, be it months or years after the matter was discharged.
DETAILS
For serious offences like murder, a Preliminary Inquiry (PI) or Paper Committal is conducted before it is sent to the High Court if enough evidence is produced.
For serious offences, a defendant is not required to plead to the charge since it is laid indictably. In a PI, the evidence in the matter is presented to the court and at the end, the Magistrate can either rule if there’s insufficient or sufficient evidence against the defendant for him/her to stand trial in the High Court or if the matter will be discharged.
Additionally, for summary criminal matters like assault, simple larceny, abusive language, robbery under arms, forgery, and also civil matters, a trial is conducted.
For summarily disposed of matters, the prosecution presents the evidence in the matter to the court and at the end of a trial, the Magistrate can either rule if there is insufficient evidence or sufficient evidence for the defendant to be convicted for the offence.
However, this is not always the case. Some matters can be dismissed due to witnesses not showing up in court or the virtual complainants turning up to court and claiming that the defendant is innocent. In some instances, compensation is also agreed upon in court for the matter to be dismissed.
COURT MATTERS
Gary Best
On December 3, 2020, former Chief of Staff of the Guyana Defence Force (GDF), Gary Best, walked free of a causing death by dangerous driving charge in which national cyclist, Jude Bentley, was killed.
Best was placed on $500,000 bail and was not required to plea to the indictable charge when it was first to read to him. The charge stated that on February 8, 2020, at Clive Lloyd Drive, Georgetown, he drove a motor vehicle, PRR 8182, in a manner dangerous to the public thereby causing the death of Bentley.

 

He was on trial in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts before Magistrate, Rondell Weever. Magistrate Weever had upheld a no-case submission that was made in October by Best’s attorneys, Nigel Hughes, Ronald Daniels and Sophia Findlay.
On October 26, Hughes submitted the no-case submission to the court for the causing death by dangerous driving charge to be dismissed against his client because the prosecution failed to prove the key elements of the offence.
Magistrate Weever had upheld the defence’s no-case submission and ruled that the prosecution failed to establish that Best was driving dangerously, therefore the charge was dismissed.
Marcus Bisram
Marcus Brian Bisram, who was extradited from the United States of America to face a murder charge, has had the matter discharged against him twice during 2020.
Marcus Bisram was charged with counselling, procuring and commanding Harri Paul Parsram, Radesh Motie, Niran Yacoob, Diodath Datt and Orlando Dickie to murder Faiyaz Narinedatt between October 31, 2016 and November 1, 2016. Narinedatt’s battered and bloody body was found on the Number 72 Village public road clad in just his trousers, while his body bore apparent marks of violence.
In March 2020, Magistrate, Renita Singh, at the Whim Magistrate’s Court had discharged the matter against Bisram for lack of sufficient evidence in the case.
However, he was later re-arrested based on orders from the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP). The DPP had contended that there was sufficient evidence for Magistrate, Renita Singh, to have committed Bisram to trial in the Berbice High Court.
However, Bisram, through his battery of high-profile lawyers – Arudranauth Gossai, Sanjeev Datadin, Glen Hanoman, Bernard Da Silva and Dexter Todd – petitioned the High Court to overturn the decision of the DPP. The lawyers contended that the DPP’s action was ultra vires, unreasonable and outside the relevant considerations that necessitate a charge of murder.
Bisram was acquitted after a High Court Judge found that the decision by the DPP was unreasonable, unlawful and was made by ignoring relevant considerations for murder.

In her ruling, Justice Ramlall upheld the contentions of the attorneys and ordered that Bisram be immediately released from the Camp Street Prisons.
Additionally, the Judge had also granted orders quashing the decision of the Magistrate to commit Bisram to stand trial in the High Court for the offence of murder; prohibiting the DPP from proffering an indictment in the High Court charging Bisram with the offence of murder again.

Despite having the matter discharged once and acquitted the second time, on May 31, 2021, the Court of Appeal had quashed a cross-appeal by Bisram and a ruling was handed down in favour of the DPP. This decision makes way for Bisram to once again face new charges regarding the murder of Narinedatt, whose battered body was found motionless on the No.71 Public Road on November 1, 2016.
Bisram has since moved to the Caribbean Court of Justice which has suspended the Court of Appeal’s order.

Richard Persaud
Ex-Criminal Investigation Department (CID) rank, Richard Persaud, last March had a bribery charge dismissed against him. Persaud was embroiled in a scandal in which he was accused of accepting money from two women in East Canje, Berbice.
His accusers were two former employees of a Superbet outlet in Reliance, East Canje. They had claimed that he had accepted the bribe from them in the sum of $60,000 each to assist them in a matter at the court.
However, on February 10, 2021, the two female witnesses from East Canje appeared in court and while in the witness box they both told the court that the police rank had visited their home multiple times one night during the investigation of a matter they were involved in, and they were told to sign several statements.
They then said that Persaud never collected any money from them and they apologised to the court. As such the matter was dismissed against the ex-detective.
Christopher Barnwell
The matter against Guyanese cricketer, Christopher Barnwell, who was charged for allegedly assaulting a police rank, was dismissed during November 2020, due to insufficient evidence.
Barnwell, of Lot 8 Albert Street, Georgetown, was charged in August 2019. He had denied the charge, which stated that on March 23, 2019, at Thomas Lands, Georgetown, he assaulted Trevor Benn to cause him actual bodily harm.
Magistrate, Rondell Weever, in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts, had presided over the case and at the end of the trial, she ruled that there is insufficient evidence against Barnwell and the matter was dismissed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

---