Magistrate over-rules defence

But attorney Leon Gokool, who together with attorney Wayne Sturge, is representing the 13-year-old accused, told the magistrate that they intend to file for judicial review to challenge her decision.

Saying that he was out of the country when the inquiry began, Sturge told Ayers-Caesar he intended to make certain applications before the inquiry commenced but “it (inquiry) began like a thief in the night.”

The 13-year-old youth is jointly charged with a 16-year-old boy with Luke’s murder. Luke’s body was discovered in a canefield at the back of his Orange Valley Road, Carapichaima home on March 26.

Last week Friday, Gokool had submitted to the magistrate that by starting the preliminary inquiry in the absence of the 13-year-old accused parent or guardian the court had breached the Children’s Act.

The attorney had also requested that Ayers-Caesar ban the media from the hearing to avoid among other things, pre-trial publicity. The magistrate also heard legal arguments from Director of Public Prosecutions, Roger Gaspard, who is representing the State in the inquiry.

In giving her ruling yesterday, Ayers-Caesar said the court was of the view that the media had acted responsible in its reporting. On the issue of pre-trail publicity, the magistrate advised the attorneys that they could raise that issue at another time.

Ayers-Caesar recalled that on previous occasions she had inquired about the whereabouts of the accused mother or guardian.

On one occassion, the magistrate said she was informed by attorney Daril Giles, who then represented the 13-year-old, that the boy’s mother was afraid to attend court because tensions “were running high in the matter.”

On another occasion, Ayers-Caesar said the accused told her that his mother would not be attending court.

Saying that parents of the other accused face the same predicament but yet they have been in court on every occasion, Ayers-Caesar said by the 13-year-old accused parent’s absence she has shown no desire to be part of the court proceedings.

But Gokool told the magistate that the accused boy’s mother would attend court if she (magistrate) would guarantee her protection. Ayers-Caesar replied that the woman would be afforded the same protection as the parents of the other accused.

Sturge told Ayers-Caesar that he needed his client’s mother in court because they had been having difficulty in obtaining proper instructions from the accused due to a trust issue.

Referring to Ayers-Caesar ruling with regards to the accused boy’s mother, the attorney said his client was charged with one of the most ghastly murders in the country and the public will believe that his mother had abandoned him.

He said that he had intended to make certain safety arrangements for the accused boy’s mother to attend court before the matter started.

Referring to Sturge suggestion that the inquiry began like a “thief in the night,” Gaspard recalled that the defence attorneys had agreed to start the inquiry on August 4.

Sturge told Ayers-Caesar that before he can file for Judicial Review (JR) he has to send a letter to the Attorney General (AG). The attorney said they intend to give the AG 14 days to respond and not the required 21 days.

Saying that she had to give the attorney’s leave to file for Judicial Review, Magistrate Ayers-Caesar adjourned the case to September 13.

Five witnesses, including Luke’s mother, Pauline Lum Fai and four police witnesses were excused from attending the next court hearing.