Dear Editor,
I write in relation to an article in the Stabroek News of Saturday, February,12, 2011 under the caption, ‘Lawyer’s court outburst results in further delay for client -discharge of jury in murder trial.’
This article was designed to disparage me in the practice of my profession, and distract me from pursuit of my nomination as PNCR presidential candidate for the 2011 national and regional Elections.
It is grossly inaccurate due mainly to the fact that it is based on hearsay since none of your reporters were present in court on that day. Miss Sara Bharrat who was several court rooms away talking with some policewomen, refused to go into Justice Patterson’s court despite my request, to cover my application.
I shall now point out the inaccuracies in the said article. The very first paragraph is not only false but malicious. It reads thus:
“Attorney Basil Williams in the High Court levelled accusations against a state prosecutor and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) over his client’s case not being called but this outburst had the reverse result as the sitting judge, after reprimanding Williams, agreed with the prosecutor that his arguments would have prejudiced the jury.”
The truth is that I addressed the court first and outlined my case to support my application that my client, Quincie McLennon who is the longest in prison awaiting trial (6 years) should either be tried or placed on bail.
State prosecutor Ms Judith Gildharie did not interrupt me whilst I was addressing the court, and in turn addressed the court contending that I was in effect lying about the understanding /undertaken she had given me in the presence of Justice Patterson. Ms Gildharie further suggested that since I was out of the country, I missed my turn, thereby inferring that my client was in line for trial as agreed but for my absence. Ms Gildharie then told the court including all the jurors that at the last gaol delivery it was agreed that Shawn Richardson’s case would be tried before McLennon’s since the latter had already been tried for another murder.
Despite recognizing how fatal Ms Gildharie’s statement was to my client being tried before those jurors I did not interrupt her. Upon Ms Gildharie’s completion of her address, I got to my feet and responded. I tried to soften the impact of the indecent disclosure by the state prosecutor by informing the court that the prosecutor spoke a half-truth, since she did not disclose my client had also been acquitted of the murder.
It was this point that Ms Gildharie sprang to her feet visibly upset and interrupted me. I remained on my feet and in response to Ms Gildharie’s suggestion that I should sit I told her that I was on my feet and was not finished. Justice Patterson then told her to sit down. I never told her to shut up. Justice Patterson then told me that I had discussed the details of the said murder case in the presence of the jury and I told him that it was the state prosecutor who had first introduced this other murder case knowing fully well that no trial could proceed before those persons once she said that. I also pointed out that I was not surprised that this was done since the DPP had no leg to stand on in not proceeding with the trial of my client.
I informed the court that Justice of Appeal Charles Ramson, as he then was, in the case of a murder charge against Keron Lord, chastised another state prosecutor for causing the murder trial of Keron Lord to be aborted by Justice Brassington Reynolds, after she disclosed in the presence of the jury that Keron Lord was serving 12 years imprisonment having previously pleaded guilty to manslaughter for the same killing.
Justice Patterson then ruled that he was refusing bail to Quincie McLennon and that he was adjourning the matter to March 7, 2011 when he would look at it, though he felt that the trial could not proceed before those jurors present in the court. I then suggested that Justice Patterson transfer my client’s case to the other judge of the criminal sessions to prevent my client languishing in jail for another session, but he refused.
At no time did I level accusations, make an outburst, or make arguments which prejudiced the jury. Nor was I reprimanded by Justice Patterson who never called on me to apologize to Ms Gildharie or the court.
As to the events of Friday, February 11, 2011, I cannot say, because I was not in court that day. I, however, reject out of hand the words “he informed the jury that due to Williams’ conduct and statements on Thursday…” These statements are contemptuous of Justice Patterson as well as libellous of me. They suggest that the judge was impotent to protect proceedings in his courtroom, where I had broken all the rules of decorum.
Therefore this article is yet another in a long line of articles which seek to denigrate me in the practice of my profession. They continue to fail. Editor, I trust that you will give equal prominence to my response to your article as you did with yours.
Yours faithfully,
Basil Williams
Editor’s note
Ms Bharrat did not receive an invitation to go into Justice Patterson’s court and consequently did not refuse to do so. For the rest, we stand by our story