A long-running court matter against Leader of the United Workers Party (UWP), Dr. Thomson Fontaine, has been adjourned for the 24th time.
The eight-year-old matter against Dr. Fontaine stemmed from an incident that dates back to February 7, 2017. On that day, the United Workers Party (UWP), which was the parliamentary opposition at the time, held a meeting on Kennedy Avenue in Roseau calling for the resignation of Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit. Following this, various businesses were vandalized in the capital city. Several opposition members were subsequently charged with inciting violence and obstructing justice.
“My matter has been adjourned until April of next year,” he said while standing outside of the magistrate’s court on Thursday morning. “Another delay of several months. I showed up this morning in the rain, but that’s it, that’s the system. We will be back in court in April.”
He said “the struggle continues.”
Following Thursday’s adjournment, Dr. Fontaine explained further during a Facebook video that the two charges against him went to the magistrate’s court, where a determination would be made as to whether there was enough evidence from the government to send that case to the high court.
“That took several years, I was out of the country at the time,” He explained. “I found out that the case was going on. I informed the court that I was coming back to Dominica. They sent police officers to the airport, where I was arrested on arrival back in Dominica.”
On April 23, 2022, Dr. Fontaine was arrested at the Douglas Charles airport upon arrival in Dominica, on a bench warrant issued by former Magistrate Asquith Riviere on November 22, 2018, following his failure to appear at two court hearings. He later appeared in court on April 29, where bail was granted to him, and on May 9, the court granted a variation of bail giving him permission to travel to South Sudan, where he is currently employed as the Policy Advisor to that government.
One year later, on April 28, 2023, the Preliminary Inquiry into the case against Dr. Fontaine commenced. The prosecutor, Trinidadian attorney Queen’s Counsel, Israel Khan, assisted by his son Daniel Khan, informed the court of their intent to proceed with the case by way of paper committal. Consequently, during the committal process, the witnesses’ statements and documentary evidence were tendered to the Court without the witnesses having to testify at the Preliminary Inquiry.
Dr. Fontaine appeared before Magistrate Laudat, and eventually the said magistrate decided that there was enough evidence, though paper committal, to send the case to the High Court.
“But what he did at the time was to maintain the charge of obstruction in the magistrate’s court and then to send the charge of riotous behaviour to the high court,” he stated. “That happened a couple years ago, but when it got to the high court, it moved relatively quickly.”
He continued, “So the high court quickly heard the case. We immediately put in for a no-case submission, which was accepted by the high court, that I had absolutely no case.”
Furthermore, Dr. Fontaine pointed out that the judge prevented his arraignment as well as the charge being read to him.
He said the judge was of the opinion that this particular matter was a frivolous charge, and he dismissed every single charge.
“He dismissed the charge against me,” Dr. Fontaine revealed. “And in his ruling, the charge indicated that the Government of Dominica was forbidden to take any further action against Dr. Fontaine on anything relating to the events of September 7, 2017.”
He added, “So we fully expected that covered and based on the way the judgement was written, that also covered the matter at the magistrate’s court, which was ongoing under a different magistrate. That is the charge of obstruction.”
Dr. Fontaine went on to add that at the next hearing for the obstruction case, the order of the high court judge was taken to the magistrate.
He revealed that the magistrate then said that this doesn’t apply to him because the case number under which he was hearing Dr. Thomson’s case wasn’t included in the judgement of the high court.
“My lawyers effectively went back to the high court asking the judge to compel the magistrate to adhere to that case in the lower court. We did that, and that is taking time to go through,” Dr. Fontaine revealed. “ In the meantime, the magistrate is continuing to hear the case against me in the lower court, and that is the reason why I was in court today.”
He concluded, “The fact that we got that major victory in the high court, we fully expected that my 8-year ordeal would be over. But that has not been the case, we continue, and this morning when we appeared in court, we were told that we would have to come back in April.”
Dr. Fontaine………jealousy is de root of evil.
How many of dem in dlp can boast of similar credentials such as yours?
They seem to be unable to purchase such credentials with ALL of de money they possess put together.
all de property, bank accounts etc. they possess……..all they have is a seat……a chair……an office…….and with de salary and de rest we know nothing about……..they still trying in vain.
de ting is you have NEVER ben BOUGHT………you refused to join dem and they will keep whining
He is another double standard jacka.Skerrit is controlling the court,but all you drag him to the same court like a common criminal in a dual citizenship case all you know all you cannot win.I wish Skerrit had that power so he could jail all enemies of the state and enemies of progress.Nep have about 5,000,the housing revolution about 6,000,de $300 monthly about 3,000,the yes we care about 300.A about 15,000 are benefitting financially from those social programmes all you against all.And all you expect dose people to vote all you.Thompson Fontaine base on his record of dishonesty is not example for a young person,de man is a failure.No family,no house no land,and with all de help he help de whole world he cannot get a job.Something is wrong with the world,de world have something against Thompson Fontaine.Maybe de IMF have a letter following him everywhere he go and daycallaying him.
To those in the judiciary, government ministries and CDPF who are hell-bent on throwing Dr. T in the calaboose ,I say to you;”one day, one day, kangkalay. Chack-coeshoun-nee-samdi-yoe” . Hell has no fury when compared to an innocent politician who has been seriously victimized. Time will tell….keeping watching this space and remember I told you so. Just look at Who would have thought Trump would president again? Hmmmmmm:twisted:
Hang in there Dr. T, the good lord that you and I serve is good ALL THE TIME!
so what about Mr.Speaker?is he not guilty as hell?….so because skerrit butter his mouth and he cross… skerrit has the power like jesus to forgive him?. this country of mine.. stinks.. . but let the highness know….the American are near…to Venezuela……just be careful ….
I guess some of those adjournment was because of his working in South Sudan
Some of the adjournments occurred with his presence in court. If the man attend court and the case have to be adjourned due to lack of evidence shouldn’t the the DPP be instructed to drop the case and stop wasting the man’s time? It is ridiculous that this case be allowed to continue after eight years and 24 adjournments. This judicial system need a complete overhaul. Although I’m not a fan of UWP, I like Thomson Fontaine as a person. A very nice guy.
Thompson Fontaine is recorded on the night of February 7 2017 saying to the police”I will not entertain a conversation with you”When the police told him about the offence of obstruction.
I cannot believe that a person who claimed to have served in the American Arm Forces, and also in the Canadian Arm Forces, and in Dominica police force have never heard the legal term the Miranda warning, or “right!”
You are so lie: if this is true: “I will not entertain a conversation with you”When the police told him about the offence of obstruction.” Thomson had the legal right not to say anything to any so called Dominica puppet police, because anything he told the police, any answer he gave to the police could and can be used against him in a court of law.
That is why in common law there is what is known as ones Miranda warning: which is ” you have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.” Police must read these rights prior to custodial interrogation, and the detained must understand them prior waving them to speak:…
And?????
Isn’t that his right not to engage them?