DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS COMMENTS ON BOU NAHRA'S CASE

October 25, 2007

Since news of the acquittal of businessman Chayben Bou Nahra on manslaughter charges was announced a number of organizations have expressed displeasure. Love News spoke earlier with Director of Public Prosecutions Lutchman Sooknandan.

Lutchman Sooknandan,Director of Public Prosecutions:

“When I took office, the beginning of this year, I inherited a file in which there was no caution statement. I launched an investigation to obtain fruitful results; hence, I was forced from what was in the file, to reduce the charge from murder to manslaughter hoping that this case would have at least reached the jury for them to make a denomination. I am disturbed about what happened yesterday, when four police officers chose on their own permission to give contradictory testimonies, totally different from what they stated in their statements. Something of that nature was not expected of them. When I say it was not expected of them I meant that they are the ones that do the investigation. This DPP office must conduct the investigation and we will rely on the police to do their investigation. The file is forwarded here, a preliminary inquiry is held, and then we indict that person. So if they, who suppose, at all levels, uphold the rule of law and do their investigation with honesty and integrity and they told their story to their own volition and I don’t know where we are heading for. It’s a bad discipline and I hope that this can be corrected and I hope that this does not become the norm and I also hope that the Commissioner of Police and the relevant authorities look at the travesty of justice that took place yesterday and try honestly to curb this and future officers who will testify will learn from this, and this does not become to the norm to be expected because it does not spell good for Belize.”

Crown Counsel Tracy Sosa told us thing went terribly wrong in Justice Adolph Lucas’ court. She said what happened was unexpected and caught them by complete surprise.

Tracy Sosa,Crown Counsel:

“The cooks of the prosecutions case, dropped into deep water because the officers who we depended on to identify Mr. Boh Nahra as the person who was at the scene of the crime on that morning, who they dealt with on that scene, who they escorted to CIB, who they detained, who they cautioned; we expected them to identify him as that person, to link him to the crime. As you know, we had no eyewitnesses to the crime. The caution statement mysteriously disappeared and so that was what we were left with, circumstantial evidence, which we expected our police officers, after interviewing them, to come to court and identify Mr. Boh Nahra as that person. When that didn’t happen with the first witness we thought okay, when the second one came we are going to get the identification. When the third one came, that didn’t happen and we knew what we were facing. I immediately called the director and I addressed him on what all was happening in court and I took my instructions from him. I still went ahead and called the final officer and of course, he could not make a link between the person he dealt with on the night of September 17^th, and the person whom he charged later in July, for the crime of manslaughter. He could not say what the relationship between those two persons was. Subsequently I knew we had no case. We could not proceed further because we could not identify Mr. Boh Nahra as the person at the scene. Without that, we had nothing. The only other witnesses that were left to call were the formal witnesses which would have been the doctor, which could not have helped the case in any way. When I started my opening address to the jury, as I always do in all my cases I explained to them what were the elements that we need to prove and everyone who knows the law, knows that the prosecution has the burden to prove even though each and every element of whatever crime it is that they are charging. If they cannot prove identity, we have no case. And so, we could not proceed any further and that is when I informed the court that because of evidence or lack of evidence thereof coming from the witnesses I had called already. I have no choice but to offer no additional evidence, because we could not prove the identity.”

Crown Counsel Cecil Ramirez said the D-P-P’s office did all it could with what it had.

Cecil Ramirez,Crown Counsel:

“I was sitting in court and I was there where the members of the press were, there with Ms. Tracy, she made it on the spot advice. And when the first witness indicated that he was not able to identify the accused, I said well, probably the others will. There was no indication with them from their interview in July, and what happened in here the day before in this office. And when the second police witness said that he could not identify the accused, them I began to wonder what was happening. And then when the third witness said that then I said well there is the case, the case has gone and in fact, this case would have to not go to the jury which we thought at least could happen. What I’d like to say is that for the public out there, there have been lawyers who call in and speak about you but you have to send more experienced Crown counsel. This needed a magician or somebody who could make these guys remember because they all said that they didn’t remember. So this was not an issue of experience, this was an issue of officers deciding not to give evidence in accordance with statements that they had given just days after the shooting had occurred.”

A police release says the Commissioner of Police received a telephone call yesterday from the Director of Public Prosecution, Mr. Sooknadan where the results of the case was discussed. The Commissioner immediately directed Officer Commanding Eastern Division A-C-P Allen Whylie for Internal Affairs to conduct an investigation into the matter.  This investigation has been ongoing.

The Commissioner of Police would like to assure the public that his office will not, in anyway, condone any misconduct on the part of Police officers, and if the investigation proves wrong doing on any officers’ part, then disciplinary action will be taken.  When we spoke to D-P-P Sooknandan we asked him how these actions would affect the public’s confidence in his office.

Lutchman Sooknandan,Director of Public Prosecutions:

“I will say this categorically, that what happened yesterday was out of the norm. This is not how cases are prosecuted. This is not expected behavior coming from the police. This is a force, and in my twenty years of working with the legal system here, this is the first time that something of this nature has occurred so blatantly, we’ll always have police witnesses who will forget an item in their statement, but not blatantly is what transpired yesterday, suffering from amnesia, all four of them, one after the other. This is unheard of in any part of the world, and I’m sure that I hope that internal faith will look into the conduct of these officers and take it very seriously.”

|

|