Lawyer’s assault trial finally gets go-ahead
A lawyer who has denied a string of assault charges is to face trial this month after a series of delays.
Chavelle Dillon, the alleged victim, who appeared in Magistrates' Court last week on a court order, was ordered to attend the trial of Kamal Worrell, 39, on March 16 after she twice missed earlier trial dates.
Magistrate Khamisi Tokunbo ordered the two to stay away from one another in light of concerns that they lived together despite bail conditions that banned contact between the two.
He told Mr Worrell: “You know that you are on bail and that your condition is to have no contact.
“It is the Crown's position that they will take action if you continue to violate this.”
Mr Tokunbo told Ms Dillon: “The same applies to you.”
Ms Dillon, 26, did not appear for the trial of Mr Worrell when it was scheduled to start on Monday, despite a court order to attend.
She also missed a trial date set for February 6.
Mr Worrell, from Warwick, has denied several charges that he assaulted Ms Dillon in 2018 and 2019.
He appeared in court on August 28 last year and pleaded not guilty to assaulting and wounding Ms Dillon on June 1, 2019, in Warwick.
Prosecutors said last October that they planned to proceed with another six allegations of similar offences on November 14, 2018, that had been withdrawn by Ms Dillon.
She dropped the complaints against Mr Worrell earlier this year, but prosecutors confirmed on January 22 that they still intended to continue the case “as a matter of public interest”.
Ms Dillon said last week that she maintained contact with Mr Worrell because the two had a child.
She added: “I needed somewhere for me and my child to stay. Where am I supposed to go with my child? He's one year old.”
Mr Tokunbo said: “I have nothing to say to you about that.”
Alan Richards, for the prosecution, said that the Crown would take action against Mr Worrell if they believed that he was in breach of his bail.
• 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.