A woman who contacted two jurors in the middle of her aunt’s Supreme Court trial was sentenced to seven months behind bars, The Royal Gazette can report.

Donté Allen, 33, pleaded guilty earlier in Magistrates’ Court to charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice in connection with messages she sent on February 5, 2026 to two jurors in the trial of Desiree O’Connor that was under way that month.

Both of the jurors received messages on social media from someone who claimed Ms O’Connor was their aunt, calling her “wicked” and making allegations concerning the case.

Messages to one of the jurors, sent via WhatsApp, were linked to Allen’s phone and she was arrested on February 6.

The discovery of the messages caused the court to dismiss the jury and abruptly halt the trial, which was nearing completion at the time with all the evidence already heard.

Ms O’Connor’s case was retried this week, with a jury finding her not guilty by a unanimous verdict yesterday of charges of possessing a firearm, ammunition and crack cocaine.

In a June 25 sentencing hearing, magistrate Maria Sofianos said Allen’s actions had caused considerable damage.

She told the court: “Serving as a juror is a mandatory and extremely important public duty.

“For citizens of our free and democratic society, it is a vital civic responsibility and a privilege that ensures the good order of society at large.

“When a member of the public takes it upon themselves to deliberately contact or approach a juror, the court views it as a direct attack on the administration of justice.

“In this case, two jurors were contacted.

“Had Allen’s unlawful actions not been discovered, they undoubtedly would have influenced the outcome of the Supreme Court trial, possibly carrying dire repercussions for the defendant, Ms O’Connor.

“As it stands, Allen has impeded the administration of justice, wasted the jurors’ time and caused additional expense to the public purse as the trial had to be aborted and the defendant, Ms O’Connor, must now be retried.

“Allen’s actions must be heavily penalised. She had absolutely no right to interfere.”

Ms Sofianos noted that a social inquiry report found that Allen’s mental health had been impacted by unresolved grief, including the deaths of several family members, and ongoing family conflicts.

The magistrate wrote that while Allen’s actions were described by her counsel as “impulsive”, she had taken the time to attend the trial, observe the jury and contact two jurors with messages intended to influence the trial’s outcome. She called her actions “deliberate and calculated”.

She said that Allen had treated the Supreme Court in “contemptuous fashion” and undoubtedly caused the jurors she contacted to suffer stress and anxiety. She added that any civilian who initiated or facilitated contact with a sitting juror should expect an immediate custodial sentence.

However, Ms Sofianos also noted that the jurors were not approached in person, threatened or bribed, and that neither juror was “corrupted” by the messages.

In all the circumstances, she found that a seven-month sentence for both offences would be appropriate, ordering that the terms run concurrently.

Ms Sofianos also found that there was no compelling reason to suspend the sentences, in whole or part, or to include a period of probation to follow the sentence.

The magistrate said that Allen was an intelligent woman and urged her to seek assistance for her mental health when she was released from custody.

She added: “You need to address your emotions and feelings of anger, frustration, trauma and strong feelings associated with what happened between you and your aunt.

“Once you do that, you may be able to find a release and move on with your life.”

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers