Election fraud trial to proceed summarily from Feb 17 – Chief Magistrate rules

…cites public interest, need to conclude case as soon as possible

Acting Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty has ruled that the case involving the nine persons charged with election fraud, will proceed summarily and that the case will restart from February 17, 2025, a ruling she noted is in the public interest.
During a sitting of her court on Monday, the acting chief magistrate followed up her December 30, 2024 ruling for the restart of the election fraud case, by ruling that the matter will proceed summarily.

This means that the matter will be ruled on by the chief magistrate herself. Acknowledging the length of time the matters have already been before the court, as well as the long road ahead before these matters are concluded, McGusty noted that it is in the public interest as well as the interest of the defendants to have these matters proceed summarily instead of indictably.
The acting chief magistrate noted the pitfalls of dealing with the matters indictably, since this would mean every charge would have to be dealt with separately. And had she chosen to go this route, a preliminary inquiry would have needed to be done before the matter could even be referred to the High Court for a final ruling.
In her ruling, the acting Chief Magistrate cited the Administration of Justice Act and noted the need for a timely conclusion to the over four year-long case. McGusty meanwhile also did not delve into the matter of penalties, since according to her this would presuppose guilt.
Another issue raised during the conference was the status of two additional charges, which had previously been determined by the Magistrate court would be classified as indictable, before being shifted to summary trial status.
Special Prosecutor, King’s Counsel Darshan Ramdhani has been requesting that these two charges be reinstated as indictable offences, asserting that the earlier decision was incorrect and warrants reconsideration.
On the other hand, defense lawyer Nigel Hughes had countered that the charges had already been reviewed and appealed by higher courts. Hughes had therefore argued that it would be inappropriate for the magistrate to revisit this matter.
When Ramdhani brought these charges to McGusty’s attention on Monday, the acting Chief Magistrate sided with the defense and declined to make a pronouncement on the charges, since in her view this would usurp the power of the High Court.

Dates
Meanwhile, there was much back and forth regarding the dates for the case. While there were no difficulties with the case being held on February 17 at 1:00pm, February 18 from 09:30h and February 19 from 09:30 to noon, defense counsel Eusi Anderson indicated that he would be leaving the country for China and that this would prevent him from joining in on the case for the remainder of February.
He even ruled out participating via zoom, since the time court would be in session would be “sleep time” for him in China. However, Anderson did commit to “clearing his schedule” in March.
All parties were able to agree on the cases continuing from March 17 to 18 and 20 to 21. After March 24, however, it was agreed that since the defense have cases during this week, the dates would be left tentative until they can be finalized in consultation with those other courts.
Nine persons are before the court this case, which pertains to the March 2020 general and regional elections. They include former Region Four Returning Officer, Clairmont Mingo; former Chief Elections Officer Keith Lowenfield and his former Deputy, Roxanne Myers.
Also charged are former PNCR Chairperson Volda Lawrence; PNCR activist Carol Smith-Joseph; and GECOM employees Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Michelle Miller and Denise Babb-Cummings.
Together, these nine defendants confront 33 counts of election-related fraud, focused on alleged efforts to manipulate voting results. Initially overseen by Senior Magistrate Leron Daly, the trial began in July 2024, but was paused following her extended medical leave, which has resulted in the trial being reassigned to Magistrate McGusty.
When the matter was called on December 8, 2024, the defense had pressed for a fresh start to the already delayed trial. On the other hand, the prosecution had argued that a restart of the case was completely unnecessary and that all the court needed to do was to recall the previous witnesses. Ultimately, however, McGusty had ordered a restart in the election fraud trial. (G3)