Full Court again rejects application to challenge ruling in Reid et al fraud trial

By Clinton McGregor  

 

  

The Full Court has again rejected an application by the attorneys for former Education Minister Ruel Reid and his co-accused for leave to challenge a ruling by the judge at his fraud trial. 

 

The defence had applied to the Supreme Court for judicial review of a ruling by trial judge, Sanchia Burrell, who refused their application to throw out the case. 

 

In January a single judge in the Supreme Court rejected the application.

 

 But the attorneys renewed the application before a panel of judges before the Full Court maintaining that the judge should have granted them leave to seek judicial review.

 

During the fraud trial in October last year, the attorneys, led by Hugh Wildman had contended that the indictment order — the legal document forming the basis of the trial — only had the names Mr. Reid and co-accused Professor Fritz Pinnock, and made no direct mention of the other three accused; Mr Reid's wife Sharen, daughter Sharelle, and Councillor Kim Brown Lawrence. 

 

Mr. Wildman told the court, that "This cannot be cured," and said the trial is proceeding on an order that is non-existent. 

 

He argued that the case should be dismissed as a result. 

 

But Senior Parish Judge Sanchia Burrell disagreed, ruling that all five accused fall within the ambit of the indictment and that trial will proceed. 

 

Mr. Wildman took the matter to the Supreme Court, but on January 16, a single judge dismissed the application for leave to seek judicial review Court of the trial judge's decision. 

 

The lawyers persisted and renewed their application before a full panel of judges comprising Justices David Batts, Dale Palmer and Tara Carr. 

 

On Friday, the panel rejected the application. 

 

In a stinging rebuke, the Full Court described the application by Mr. Reid's attorneys as inappropriate and without merit. 

 

The panel argued that the indictment in the fraud case was clear and unambiguous as to who have been charged, the offence for which they were charged, and the information relative to the accused.

 

The Court also argued that there was no prejudice to the accused in the indictment.

 

Against this background, the Full Court said the subject matter is inappropriate for this process as no question of an excess of jurisdiction has been demonstrated by the applicants, adding that they have alternate remedies opened to them.

 

The Full Court made it clear that the application by the attorneys in the case is unmeritorious; they have no arguable ground for judicial review with a real prospect of success. 

 

The attorneys for Councillor Kim Brown Lawrence were not a party to the application. 

 

Mr. Wildman told Radio Jamaica News on Friday afternoon that the ruling will be appealed. 

 

The fraud trial is scheduled to resume on Monday. 

 

At the trial, prosecutors told the court that between March 2016 and October 2019, the five accused — Ruel Reid; his wife Sharen Reid, who was employed to the Caribbean Maritime University (CMU) as manager of legal affairs; their daughter Sharelle Reid; Councillor Kim Brown Lawrence; and former president of CMU Fritz Pinnock, participated in a scheme with others unknown, which siphoned off more than $25 million from both the Ministry of Education and the CMU. 

 

All five accused are facing charges of conspiracy to defraud. 

 

Mr. Reid and Mr. Pinnock are also charged with acts of corruption. 

 

Mr. Reid, his wife, daughter, and Mrs. Brown Lawrence are charged with acquiring and handling criminal property. 

 

They are also accused of participating in arrangements to retain those assets.