Content on this page requires a newer version of Adobe Flash Player.

Get Adobe Flash player

Advertisement

This Week's Polls - VOTE NOW!

SMALLTALK Double Trouble Babes!

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

How would you grade WASCO's management of the water crisis?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Do you think persons should be jailed for water misuse?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Is St. Lucia really Independent?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Advertisements




Suggested Sites


Claudius vows to oppose DPP!


Written By: Nicole Mc Donald on Feb 5th, 2010

Talk-show host Claudius Francis (left) yesterday took the DPP Victoria Charles-Clarke (center) to task for charging a man with murder  when the man was “clearly defending himself.” Defending the accused man is lawyer Leslie Mondesir (right).

Talk-show host Claudius Francis (left) yesterday took the DPP Victoria Charles-Clarke (center) to task for charging a man with murder when the man was “clearly defending himself.” Defending the accused man is lawyer Leslie Mondesir (right).


By the measure of talk-show host Claudius Francis, a man charged with murder yesterday is a hero and should be given the
nation’s medal of honour. And judging from the calls he received to his Straight-Up radio program many agree that the man who was involved in an altercation in late January is a victim of a system gone terribly wrong.

It was on January 25th that the nation learned that a 22-year-old of Conway was killed. Information later surfaced from several eyewitnesses that Jamal Ledger also known as ‘Too Slack’ died after being stabbed by a 23-year-old man from La Clery, he [Ledger] was reportedly trying to rob. The man, who many considered the victim, was charged Tuesday morning, to the surprise of his attorney Leslie Mondesir, with murder and has been remanded into custody.

The STAR spoke to Leslie Mondesir yesterday who said that when he was told the charge against his client was murder he “thought it was a joke.”

“I was and still am in shock,” he told us. “I cannot understand after guys try to attack and rob a guy and he tries to protect himself, there’s an altercation and one dies, how a charge of murder can be preferred.”

Mondesir says he has already filed a bail application and is also expected to appear with his client this morning for an initial hearing.

But how could a man defending his property and person be charged with murder? That’s what many wanted to know as they called Francis’ program yesterday. Francis opened his show by relaying the information on the case, saying that he has spoken to lawyers, police officers and others close to the case. The host also questioned the powers of the Director of Public Prosecutions and advocated for constitutional reform to take into consideration curving those powers. At least three lawyers also called the program to question the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Victoria Charles Clarke and the police.

In his call to the show defense attorney Lorne Theophilus explained that the defendant in this case might have to wait up to two months for a sufficiency hearing.

Both Francis and Theophilus lamented that the defendant had no recourse against the state for wrongful imprisonment should the case be dropped.

“One of the factors the judge can take into consideration is the strength of the case against this man,” said Theophilus, speaking about the bail application. He also touched on the issue of the DPP’s powers.

“It almost makes it seem as if we have come to a point where persons must be answerable in order to ensure they function effectively. One of the things that must be taken into consideration, especially by the DPP’s office before advising the police to charge, is actually looking into the viability of the case,” said the lawyer, noting that the DPP must listen to the investigating officers.

“ . . .You must listen to the opinion of the persons on the ground because they are the ones dealing with the material evidence and if the material evidence points to self-defense it doesn’t take too much of a legal luminary to determine what self-defense is.”

Among the other lawyers who called the show was Alberton Richelieu.

“The DPP is supposed to be someone with selective thinking, some sort of discretion based on common sense. In as much as there are many killings and there is community abhorrence to it, at the same time in deciding whether you going to charge a man you must look at all of the circumstances of the case,” he said. “The fundamental error is that the DPP believes that everybody must be prosecuted, but the DPP’s role is really being a minister of justice . . .”

Francis then stepped in to the agree that the “DPP’s role is not to secure conviction but to present the facts.”
Richelieu added that he would offer his services free of charge to the defendant in the case.

“The DPP is not there to persecute but to prosecute,” Richelieu added while admitting he was not sure about the circumstances of the case.

“But if all the witnesses so far support and corroborate this young man’s story, this is a serious thing,” said Richelieu. “At the end of the day what you require is fairness to ensure that justice is served.”

Francis and Richelieu said the DPP might have instead chosen to go the route of having an Inquest.

Other callers to the show questioned what would happen to them if they were defending themselves or another person against being robbed.

Said one caller: “This is a bad precedent that is being set. Are you telling that if I were to come upon a tourist being robbed and I were to confront the assailant and harm them in some fatal way that I have to now think twice and have to think about probably being charged with murder?”

As for his support for the defendant in the case Francis said he will be in court when the case is called and “I am gonna be marching, I am gonna be doing a whole bunch of things.

Francis sounded broken as he went on with the show: “This is an outrage if ever there was one . . . I have never felt so low about the justice system as I do right now . . .”

He beckoned media personnel to call the show and closed the lines to other callers so he could take a call from fellow talk-show host Rick Wayne.

“It is important that we talk about this from a media standpoint . . . Let’s talk about something fundamental . . . a young man’s liberty in the face of what is universally acclaimed as self-defense. I am so cut up about this thing,” said Francis.

The final caller to the yesterday’s show was talk-show host Rick Wayne, who asked an important question: “Is there the remotest possibility that the DPP has information that you don’t have?”

“Let’s put it this way, I have seen nearly everything the DPP has . . .” said Francis.

Wayne finally said: “I am very concerned that our DPPs are all powerful. I remember criticizing the previous government for having the DPP as ‘acting’ for years which left her at the mercy of politicians. Then the new government came in and almost as if they were extremely happy with her work, they confirmed her in the post—in the process rendering her a law onto herself. She has the final word on everything involving state prosecutions and Lord alone knows what she has to do to get fired!”

The STAR tried to contact the DPP yesterday but she was in meetings and did not immediately return our calls.

2 Responses for “Claudius vows to oppose DPP!”

  1. Kalalu says:

    If the facts are as they have been presented so far, this is a serious error of judgement on the part of the DPP. Multiple assailants put you in fear of imminent harm to your person, you just react with all the strength adrenaline gives you. It doesn’t sound like this man went back after his assailants after the fact, this seems to have happened in the course of a fight for his life. If it comes to it, I have faith that a jury of his peers will see sense.

  2. MAAT says:

    This is what is entirely wrong with this country. The laws are not being respected by the criminals, innocent people-however they may look or perceived are targeted while attorneys and law- makers cannot interpret the law as is.

    Where in God’s name would a victim become a murderer….he was a attacked by not one, two….but four men. What was he suppose to do…get killed like that young calypsonian. This is really sad. What are people suppose to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??? when they are attacked…should they lie there and get killed.
    Though another life was taken…..and feel sorry for his family , he got what he was looking for.
    Just one week before his death, this same young man and his friends….same gang attacked a family member. Thye robbed him of his personal items and fractured a bone near his eyes….It could have been his life, if the trigger didn’t jam.
    What would have happen had this family member defended himself and killed one of them- would this be murder. This man should not be charged for any crime….as a crime was not commited. Acting to preserve one’s lives is not a crime…..it is one’s right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comments are closed

Log in
© 2009 Star Publishing Company. All Rights Reserved.