|
As the witness tampering case against embattled television station owner Chandra Narine Sharma continues,Colton Parayko Jersey, the proceedings took another twist yesterday when Special Prosecutor Sanjeev Datadin made an objection to the matter being heard before Magistrate Geeta Chandan-Edmond.According to the prosecutor,Antoine Roussel Jersey, attorney at law Nigel Hughes who is representing Sharma is also representing the magistrate in a private matter against the Judicial Service Commission.Prosecutor Datadin yesterday told the court that there was the likelihood of the present matter becoming biased.Hughes in response to Datadin’s submissions said that it was public knowledge,Jonathan Toews Jersey, long before the Sharma case started,Clark Griswold Jersey, that he was representing the magistrate.He said at no time did he request for that matter to be sent to magistrate Chandan- Edmond, and it is the Chief Magistrate who assigns cases to the various courts.The lawyer said that this same issue arose when he had a matter before Justice William Ramlal. Hughes is presently representing the judge’s sister,Niklas Hjalmarsson Jersey, Sita Ramlal,Jared Spurgeon Jersey, in a forgery and conspiracy case.The lawyer further told Kaieteur News that the Director of Public Prosecutions should notify him about all the lists of cases that he should recuse himself from.After a brief discussion between the lawyers and magistrate, the matter was adjourned until July 20,Trevor Daley Jersey, the day when Magistrate Chandan-Edmond has indicated that she would be making a ruling.However, a highly reliable source within the courts has told Kaieteur News that special prosecutor Datadin will not pursue his motion to have the magistrate recuse herself.Sharma along with five of his associates,Tyler Seguin Jersey, including his son-in-law Ravi Mangar, were all placed on $100,Brent Seabrook Jersey,000 bail by Acting Chief Magistrate Melissa Robertson after they were all charged with obstruction of justice.The matter had been delayed for over two months after the prosecution failed to commence the preliminary inquiry. |
|