Log In

Reset Password
BERMUDA | RSS PODCAST

Judge orders jury to find one defendant in Blu party trial not guilty

Zane DeSilva and his daughter at an earlier court hearing. (File photograph by Akil Simmons)

A Supreme Court jury was told yesterday to find a restaurant worker not guilty of a charge related to a party held in the midst of the pandemic.

Puisne Judge Shade Subair Williams ordered the jury to find Angela Caldwell, 45, of Warwick, not guilty to a charge of giving false information to a public officer in July 2020.

The judge told the jury the decision came as a result of “matters of the law which are in the sole provision of the court”.

The trial of the remaining two defendants — Zane DeSilva, 63, and his daughter, Zarah Harper, 38 — is scheduled to resume on Monday.

They are both accused of providing information to an official at the Ministry of National Security that they did not believe to be true.

The charge, which they deny, adds that there was an intention to cause the public officer to do something they would not otherwise do, “namely that they provided a letter stating that an event would be a charity fundraising dinner in order to be granted an exemption to hold a large group gathering under the Public Health (Covid-19 Emergency Powers) Regulations 2020”.

The charges are related to an event held on July 3, 2020 at the Blu Bar and Grill.

The court heard that Wayne Caines, then the Minister of National Security, received an e-mail from Ms Caldwell, described in the correspondence as being with the marketing department of MEF Ltd, which includes Blu among its establishments, on June 26, 2020.

A letter, signed by the restaurant’s general manager, was attached to the e-mail and mentioned reservations totalling 130 guests for July 3.

Mr Caines passed the letter to Sergeant Lyndon Raynor, who had been tasked with reviewing exceptions to the ban on large group events, who recommended that the request be rejected on the basis that there were no “extraordinary circumstances”.

On July 1, Mr Caines received a second e-mail, which stated that the event was a one-off fundraising charitable dinner to benefit Meals on Wheels.

Prosecutors have argued that the event was never intended to be a legitimate charitable fundraiser and that the organisers had intentionally misled government staff in order to secure permission to have a party.

Earlier in the trial, Peter Smith, a former president and chairman of Meals on Wheels, testified that he knew nothing of the event until he read about it in The Royal Gazette.

He told the court that Mr DeSilva had asked about having a cheque presentation for a $10,000 donation, but the charity declined the donation after questions sent to Ms Harper about the event went unanswered.

Mr Smith, however, confirmed that the charity had received “surprise” donations in the past.

The jury also heard voice notes said to be from Ms Harper’s phone, which were played in the court.

Jurors heard she said: “I had to throw that in there last night in order for the event to happen because Chris Maybury invited Wayne Caines.”

The voice notes added: “Do you know how much money we have in a plastic bag for them? Like 200 bucks because no one knew that it was a flipping charity event.

“We had to add that in there to the letter to Government in order … for the event to happen.”

Another voice note said: “So now dad is trying to put some money together along with Chris Maybury along with Blu so that we have an actual donation to give but I think 10k’s too much; do five, right?”

In a recorded police interview played before the court, Mr DeSilva denied doing anything improper.

He also accepted that he had offered some guidance to his daughter as to what should be included in a letter requesting a large-group exemption.

He told the police that money raised at the event was not accepted by Meals on Wheels and, instead, $15,000 went to the Matilda Smith Williams seniors residence.

It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. This is to prevent any statements being published that may jeopardise the outcome of that case