save a suspected killer from being charged with murder.

Solicitor General William Pearce yesterday told a judicial review hearing that Kirk Mundy simply acted "in his own self-interest'' in a bid to wriggle free of a murder charge.

Mundy was charged earlier this month with the murder of 17-year-old Canadian Rebecca Middleton on Ferry Reach, St. George's, in July 1996. She had been stabbed to death.

Co-accused Justis Smith, still only 18, was charged with the killing at the time and will re-appear in court on March 2.

But Jamaican-born Mundy, 23, is already serving five years after pleading guilty to being an "accessory after the fact''.

Mundy's lawyer Saul Froomkin said his client agreed to wear a wire tap in a jail cell with Smith and gave several statements -- including a witness statement -- to Police.

He claimed Police and the Attorney General's Chambers agreed not to charge Mundy with murder if he gave evidence against Smith.

And he said the "accessory'' case prosecutor even argued for a non-maximum sentence for Mundy because he signed a witness statement to testify against Smith.

But Canadian Mr. Pearce, arguing his first case in a Bermudian court, said: "Here there was no deal.

"It was simply a question of the accused person talking in his own best interest.

"Mundy's initial statement was designed to convince the Police to go for the `accessory after the fact' charge and to reduce the sentencing when charged.

"It was all in his own self-interest that he did those things and it was done voluntarily.

"There was no deal like you have in a case where you are charged with a serious offence and you agree on the eve of the trial to plead guilty if the main offence is dropped.'' Puisne Judge Richard Ground asked: "But the deal was implicit wasn't it?'' `No deal was made' Mr. Pearce added: "If there was any deal it was with respect to the reduction in sentence.

"But that's the extent of it. There was never any agreement to do anything more than that.'' Mr. Justice Ground asked Mr. Pearce what the Crown's response would be if "an officious bystander asked about the possibility of a future murder charge'' when such an agreement was being made.

Mr. Pearce said: "I think the response would be: `Theoretically there's always that possibility but we are not going to provide any guarantees although the odds are that that's not going to occur.'' Mr. Pearce said new medical evidence emerged last month which merited the murder charge against Mundy.

Details were read in court but Mr. Justice Ground ordered they could not be reported until the end of all criminal proceedings.

Mundy's original lawyer Mark Pettingill told the court on Friday that Mundy claimed he had consensual sex with the victim and saw Smith "punching her in the face'' before throwing a knife away.

And Mr. Pettingill claimed senior Police officers, told about Mundy's offer to wear a wire tap, said they would "discuss the matter further and with the Attorney General's Chambers''.

The lawyer said he was even told by one officer: "You have got your way,'' the very next day, when the charges were laid against Smith and Mundy.

Mr. Froomkin added: "There is no question that there was an agreement. It is not denied by Mr. Mottley. There is no contrary evidence to that fact.

"The agreement, or plea bargain, is evident in writing, by oral evidence and by conduct.'' He said prosecutor Khamisi Tokunbo gave Mundy's original hearing "a statement of facts prepared by the Crown and read into the records''.

Mr. Froomkin said: "The terms of that agreement are set out in the last paragraph.

"I quote verbatim: `The defendant has given a witness statement, see attached, of his account and has agreed to testify in any criminal court proceedings against Justis Smith in accordance therewith'.'' He said the deal was proved orally because Mr. Pettingill's evidence was not challenged in court.

And he said the deal was proved "by conduct'' because "the very next day after the offer was made, Mr. Mundy was charged in accordance with the proposal and proceeded against three months after the agreement was entered into -- during which time the Crown had sufficient time to satisfy itself as to Mr. Mundy's tale''.

Mr. Froomkin is accusing Attorney General Elliott Mottley of an "abuse of process'' and claims a fair trial is now impossible because so much time has passed and Mundy's original conviction was reported in the press.

The hearing starts again later this morning.