Who really represents Junior Phillip?

THE APPEAL of three men convicted of killing State witness Clint Huggins could not start yesterday because of uncertainty about who really represents one of the appellants, Junior “Heads” Phillip. Israel Khan SC is on record, appointed by the Director of the Legal Aid Authority, as representing Phillip at the appeal. But Khan indicated to the court yesterday that he had found no grounds on which to upset the conviction of his client. But Phillip, who was brought down from Death Row, wants another attorney to take a second look at the notes and the judge’s summing up in an attempt to overturn the conviction.

With no solution, the Court of Appeal did not entertain any submissions and the appeal was put to September. Leslie Huggins, Arnold Huggins, and Junior Phillip were sentenced to death by Madame Justice Alice Yorke-Soo Hon in the Port-of-Spain Assizes on May 8, 2003 for the murder of SRP Clint Huggins, who was shot dead on February 20, 1996 at the Uriah Butler Highway, Mount Hope. Huggins was the main State witness against Dole Chadee and his gang of nine, who were charged with the murders of four members of the Baboolal family at Williamsville on January 10, 1994. Khan and Dawn Mohan represented Phillip, while Desmond Allum SC, Rajiv Persad, and Ian Stuart Brook appeared for the Huggins. Dana Seetahal appeared for the State. The appeal was called before Justices Lionel Jones, Margot Warner, and Stanley John.

When the appeal was called, Khan told the court that he had been appointed by the Director of the Legal Aid Authority to represent Phillip. He said after looking at the summing up, he found no grounds to appeal the conviction of his client. “I have indicated this to the appellant through my instructing attorney. He is desirous of having another attorney through Legal Aid. I am not seeking to withdraw from the case, only the Director of the Legal Aid Authority can grant permission to withdraw,” Khan told the court. Khan said he had sent a letter to the Authority informing it of the situation. He pointed out to the director that the authority should seek to have another attorney appointed for Phillip. Justice Jones interjected and said that no appellant had the right to shop around for an attorney.

“I don’t know if you asking the Legal Aid Authority to get another lawyer was the right thing to do,” Justice Jones told Khan. Khan replied, “I did not think it was the right thing, but it being a capital offence, I think he could have gotten another attorney.” Justice Jones added, “But the appellant is not entitled to shop around for another attorney. Putting the burden on the Legal Aid Authority is unacceptable. If he is not satisfied with a competent counsel, let him get his own attorney.” But Khan insisted that he was representing Phillip in the appeal and stuck to his decision that there were no grounds on which to appeal. Justice John added, “How could you stand there and say you still represent the appellant?” Khan insisted that he was Phillip’s lawyer. Justice Jones then requested a meeting with the attorneys in his chambers. On their return, Justice Jones indicated that the appeal was being adjourned to September.