The State has lodged a formal appeal with the Court of Appeal in a matter involving former Postmaster General Clare Serephine-Wallace and prominent Dominican senior lawyer Michael E. Bruney after she was convicted by a Roseau Magistrate and fined on several postal matters.
She was slapped with 10 criminal charges in a matter dating back almost ten years ago.
That decision was read in court recently in which 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 she would go to jail for 9 months.
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 magistrate 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.
On the charge #1471 of 2006 of fraudulently detaining post letters was dismissed. The magistrate also dismissed #788 of 2007: detaining post letter.
However, she was convicted and found guilty on # 8030 of 2007 for detaining post letter and fined $EC650.00 to be paid by April 30, 2017 or in default four months in prison.
The magistrate also dismissed #8031 of 2007 for delaying printed papers; #1864 of 2007 for fraudulently detaining post letters; #1865 of 2007 for willfully detaining or suffering to detain several post letters and # 1866 of 2007 for willfully delaying in the course of conveyance by the post printed paper.
If not respect for journalism, at least Some miniscule technical writing would help with this esoteric gobbledygook wi pal. And that’s if readers are of any importance to this blog. Whatever DNO, English or Patwa please
According to the man… I like that…. I really like that… (reporting)…. yeah man I like that. More confused than ever….I dono who tell me to read that. Is this a joke or wha?
If she is guilty of these offenses I think that a fine of $1,900.00 is a slap on the wrist. Tampering and interfering with the delivery of mail is a serious offense.
But what is $1,900 (one thousand, nine hundred dollars) for her to pay? All you make it sound so grave. The lawyer fee I’m sure is twice or more than that.
Lord, set me free from Dominica. Dem news dere go kill me
this is too much psycho babble up to now they cant say why the appeal is taking place
was it her willfulness to commit such acts or is she appealing so they are doing the same
That article is more confusing than enlightening. Michael Bruney is mentioned in the first paragraph but we are not told what is his role in the case. Who is the complainant? Who represented the former Post Mistress?
I believe Michael Bruney is the plaintiff. Long ago I read that
But wait nuh. How recent was that decision seeing that she had to pay by end of April and look end of may an appeal is filed.
I don’t get it , this sound like a buch of psyco babble bull crap, D.N.O can you guys break this down in layman’s terminology please? was she holding back the mail that was to be mailed to people abroad, was it kept at her home?, did she fail to supervise the coming, and going of mails to and from Dominica? WHAT WAS IT? I don’t get it, inquiring mind want to know .
I agree. Please explain more clearly. And where does Michael Bruney come into this? DNO you mention his name but you do not elaborate. Was he her lawyer, or the State’s lawyer, or was he the magistrate? Or even though unlikely was he a co-accused? His name is just there with no explanation.
I need a little clarification. Was it a deliberate act, was it committed by the staff? Was the govt of Dominica or her permanent secretary mentioned in the charge?
Why is the media silent on the details of the case? I would really like to know what she is alleged to have done and why the car was brought against her?
huh???????????
The pertinent question is this? The person who convicted her and passed sentence, was she a Magistrate at the time? Can the Director of Public Prosecutions also act as a magistrate and convict someone? The answer is no, so plainly an appeal MUST succeed.
Tell us what you know cause no where in this story I see where the person who handed the judgement is mentioned eh
????