and in a surprising twist

nice6boyt7

When Nolan Connelly appeared in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court yesterday, the murmuring of those present was clearly heard, after it was alleged that the man fraudulently converted US$46,000 (G$9,200,000) to his own use and benefit.The court was told that Connelly was entrusted with the sum of money by his sister-in-law and he used the money for his own purpose.According to the prosecution, Vivian Connelly, who is the wife of the defendant’s brother, operates a business – trawlers which transport items from Trinidad and Tobago and Suriname to Guyana.Vivian Connelly, the court was told, at Houston Wharf, gave the accused the sum of money to purchase fuel. Prosecutor Lionel Harvey said the man received US$ 46,000 and converted the money to his own use and benefit. The man’s sister-in-law made contact with him after the fuel was not received, but when the fee was not recovered the police were summoned and a report was made. It was later discovered that money was located in a bank account and two vehicles had been purchased, one of which police was still waiting to recieve.The prosecutor continued his statement against the man saying that they objected to bail applications made on the man’s behalf since he had other matters pending in Essequibo where investigations are being done.Harvey said the man had been transported to Georgetown to answer to the offence, and he felt that the large sum of money taken by the defendant was enough to claim that if the accused be granted bail he would not return to answer to the matter.Defence Counsel Gordon Gilhuys told the court that the man was 50 years old and a resident of Perseverance, Essequibo. The defendant was said to have six children and is also married.Gilhuys begun his defence by telling the court that “the police think they can arrest people and keep them in the lock ups as long as they like”. The court was told that Connelly and his wife who was said to be a church leader, were detained since October 1. They were taken from their home and had not been released even after the 72- hour holding period had expired with no explanation of the offence committed.The lawyer also claimed that the man’s six children had been left unattended since the time of their parents’ arrest. The lawyer then turned his attention to the defendant’s brother, and in a surprising twist, revealed that the woman (Vivian Connelly) had nothing to do with the matter.The court was told that the brothers had the problem and the woman was only a decoy. The lawyer stated that the brothers conducted an illegal fuel smuggling ring that saw the transporting of the substance from Suriname and Trinidad to Guyana.It was also said that the defendant’s brother became greedy and wanted more money from the scam. When it was revealed to him that the man wished to give his brother no money, the police were contacted and the false claim was made against his client.The attorney also told the court that no matter was against the man in Essequibo, and as such he requested that the man be placed on reasonable bail and if it suited the court he would lodge his passport at the police station in Essequibo.The lawyer also bombarded the police saying the ranks are abusing the 72-hour detention period revealing to the court that since the time of the man’s arrest his wife had not been released and was still in the lock ups.The prosecution in every effort to keep the man in police custody told the court that it would be quite unusual for the man and his brother to have a problem, since the brother had left Guyana since the 15 of last month, and only arrived back in the country on the same morning of the hearing. The brother was present in court.After much back and forth between the prosecution and the defence the matter was finally addressed by the magistrate who refused bail.The matter was subsequently taken upstairs of the Magistrate’s Court to court two where the lawyer reapplied for bail. While in front of Magistrate Sueanna Lovell, the lawyer reiterated the particulars of his defence asking the court to grant his client bail, and emphasised that he would follow any conditions stipulated by the court.In the end the Magistrate told the lawyer that she was not convinced that the man was not a risk of leaving the court’s jurisdiction and therefore his client would be remanded to jail. She told the court that by the man’s own admittance he had access to means of travel.The matter will come up again on October 25 when the man is expected to make his next court appearance.