Blind woman loses at Privy Council

But five Law Lords of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in England recently ruled that there was no malice by police in arresting her because they simply followed the law which mandates them to act when something illegal is found on premises and its occupants are present.

The historic judgment was delivered two weeks ago in an appeal filed by Sandra Juman, 53, of Pond Street, La Romaine, who 19 years ago was arrested by officers of the San Fernando Police Station along with five other members of her household for possession of guns and ammunition. One male member of the family pleaded guilty to the offences in the magistrates’ court and was sentenced. Juman, who is blind, had also appeared before the same magistrate along with members of the family, but they all pleaded not guilty and the case was postponed for trial.

The police search of Juman’s La Romaine premises occurred on October 1, 1998 in which they allegedly found a bag containing two homemade shotguns and a shotgun cartridge in a bag next to a couch in the living room.

Juman and the five family members were taken to the San Fernando Police Station where she was also placed in a cell. She was kept overnight and charged the following day. When Juman had appeared before the magistrate, she was granted bail and released. The other male relative who confessed to the guns and ammuntion belonging to him was sentenced by the magistrate.

In 2001, after about 20 subsequent appearances, the case against Juman and the other relatives was discontinued after the police withdrew the charges, having regard to the confession of the male relative who had pleaded guilty. At the time, Juman was assistant secretary of the Blind Welfare Association of Trinidad and Tobago and worked at its South offices.

Attorneys acting on behalf of Juman, filed a lawsuit on her behalf against the State in the High Court for malicious prosecution, on the ground that the evidence suggested that Juman soley occupied the upstairs part of the house and not the downstairs on October 1, 1998 where the gun and ammunition were found by the party of officers who had searched the premises.

Additionally, she was blind and she could not have been deemed to have knowledge of the presence of the guns and ammunition. The police were therefore reckless in charging Juman for the offence, the attorneys had contended before retired judge Shafeyei Shah in the San Fernando High Court.

Shah, however, dismissed Juman’s claim for malicious prosecution, saying that based on the evidence of the police who conducted the search, they acted with reasonable cause and without malice in arresting Juman and charging her. In law, a person is deemed to be in constructive possession if he or she is present on premises or have knowledge and control of premises where something illegal is found. At the time when Juman was arrested, the law lords judgment stated, she was in the living room of the downstairs apartment.

Juman filed an appeal against Shah’s ruling and she lost there as well when in an oral judgment in 2012, Justice Maureen Rajnauth-Lee and other appellate judges Alan Mendonca and Gregory Smith, upheld Shah’s judgment.