The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court has upheld an appeal lodged by the State in a matter involving former Postmaster General Clare Serephine-Wallace and prominent Dominica senior lawyer Michael E. Bruney after she was convicted by a Roseau Magistrate and fined on several postal matters. The appeal was heard in St. Lucia.
In a matter dating back almost ten years, Seraphine -Wallace was slapped with 10 criminal charges which were filed by Bruney.
The charges were: detaining post letter; delaying post letter; delaying printed matter sent by post; fraudulently detaining post letter; detaining post letter; detaining post letter; delaying printed papers; fraudulently detaining post letters; willfully detaining or suffering to be detained several post letters; and willfully delaying in the course of conveyance by the post printed paper.
After hearing the evidence, Wallace was found guilty by the then Chief Magistrate Evalina Baptiste on four of the 10 charges.
According to documents obtained from the court, in the case #1468 (delaying post letter) of 2006, she was found guilty and fined EC$850.00 to be paid by April 30, 2017 in default 3 months jail.
She was also found guilty in #1469 of 2006 of delaying post letter and fined EC$400.00 to be paid by April 30, 2017 in default two months in jail. She was further convicted on #1470 of 2006 for delaying printed matter sent by post. Decision: no separate penalty.
Seraphine -Wallace, who has since been transferred from the post of Post Master General was fined a total of EC$1,900.00 to be paid by April 30, 2017 or in default, go to jail for 9 months.
The State’s two grounds of appeal were that on the date of the purported conviction, the magistrate (Evalina Baptiste) had no jurisdiction to convict Serephine-Wallace “since she had demitted office in November 2013 and gave her decision December 2016, three years later.
The other ground of appeal was that, “the Magistrate gave no reason (s) for her conviction contrary to section 146 of the Magistrates Code of Procedures Act.”
State attorney in the office of the attorney general, Arthlyn Nesty, led the state’s case with Clement Joseph former state attorney.
Lisa Defreitas, on behalf of Michael Bruney conceded the ground of appeal but then sought to argue for a retrial.
The court then considered that the matter had already taken over 10 years; it was not a serious matter and also the strength of the evidence to convict was lacking. There was no evidence of willful detention of mail which was critical for the finding of guilt, the court decided and therefore, denied a retrial.
The appeal was allowed and the sentence and conviction of Clare Seraphine-Wallace were quashed.
You mean to say, the Chief Magistrate reserved her judgment for three long years? magwe sa!! Couldn’t the Chief Magistrate give an ex tempore ruling back in 2013?
Your name suggests being from the dark ages of civilization. “This is only a $1900 charge and i bet she spent more than that in travel and court fees”. How stupid a statement! If one is wrongly convicted, does is matter how much you spend to get vindicated and clear your name and/or record? She is a public officer with over 20 years service and eligible for pension and a gratuity, yet she must accept the wrongful conviction so can be fired on the ground that she has been convicted? I hope you don’t get wrongly convicted and give up on your innocence Shaka ……!
Really!!!! level of comprehension at pre-school level. Wow just wow
I do not understand this: she demitted office in November 2013 (presumably Chief Magistrate) and gave her decision in December 2016. Was she still a magistrate in December 2016? Can someone clarify this?
No she was not a magistrate. She was in fact the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Are you guys serious?????? Is that a matter that really needs to go the the carribbean supreme court? What a waste of time. This is only a $1900 charge and i bet she spent more than that in travel and court fees.Why then is the Supreme court taking on the matter if it is over 10 years and not serious case? Where is our commonsense? If it takes that long for a simple matter how are caricom nationals under this court expected to get any justice for serious matters. I swear to God we are in the age of stupidity and ridiculousness in the Caribbean. Total waste of time. Is that what we set up a supreme court for?
the Supreme court is there to protect one’s character!
Oh please!!!!! Well it seems like any dog and cat that say something about you take to supreme court. Real small minded. There are some cases that just dont need to go to a supreme court. Total waste of intellectual brain. A matter like that should be appealed in state high court and supreme court should decide which cases of significance it should take. Supreme court should take cases that require a major decision thst has complicated far reaching consequences. This case is a waste of time period. Our brightest minds dealing with petty crap. Personal character my assets!!!
You really displaying your Assets. Learn the layers of the court before you open your mouth and to remove all doubt. smh
SMH Shaka, SMH.
Politics and law, what a combination in such a litigious society. How can this country every improve with such nonsensical waste of resources. Arrogance, these l-aw-iers arrogance.
If it was you, wouldn’t you go to the ends of the earth to clear your name?
Blessings upon blessings