Log In

Reset Password

Prosecutors' bid to re-charge drug suspects fails

The Crown yesterday failed in its attempt to re-charge six men accused of conspiring to bring more than $11 million of drugs into Bermuda.

Acting Senior Magistrate Carlisle Greaves last month dismissed the case after senior prosecutors failed to appear for a long form preliminary hearing as they were involved in the Justis Smith assault case.

A junior prosecutor appeared and asked for an adjournment, but defence lawyer Larry Scott successfully applied to Mr. Greaves for the case against the men to be dismissed.

The Crown has applied to Supreme Court to have Mr. Greaves' decision stayed - or frozen - until it decides whether to uphold the dismissal of the charges or overturn it.

The six men were accused of conspiring to import $11 million of cannabis and $600,000 of heroin, conspiracy to break into premises where the drugs where stored on the Island, and conspiracy to possess the drugs with intent to supply.

At Magistrates' Court yesterday, Senior Crown counsel Lloyd Rayney applied to have the men charged with the offences again.

But lawyers for the six argued this would be an abuse of process and amounted to a case of double jeopardy.

They told Senior Magistrate William Francis that as the matter was still before the Supreme Court, the men would have two identical sets of charges against them.

Mr. Francis agreed, saying: "The dismissal of the original information (charges) is before the Supreme Court and that dismissal is stayed so I don't feel I should proceed until the issue before the Supreme Court is dealt with.

"There could be double jeopardy otherwise, therefore I make no further order on this information (attempted new charges from the Director of Public Prosecutions)."

The men charged were Milford Eugene Waldron Sr., 29, of Long Bay Lane, Somerset; Milford Waldron Jr., 37, of the same address; Ramon Dwight Blanchette, 32, of Keith Hall Road, Warwick; Leon Eugene Burchall, 40, Town Hill Road, Smith's; Michael James Denbrook, 49, of Cut Road, St. George's; and his brother Ronald Denbrook, 43, of Cove Valley, St. George's.

Mr. Rayney argued yesterday: "The defence will say this should be determined before the Supreme Court.

"These offences are extremely serious. In my application, each defendant would be released on bail so there would be no prejudice.

"The matter is before the Supreme Court, that is true about the previous information, but there is nothing to prevent any of the defendants leaving the jurisdiction.

"The current information (charges) before the court is valid. Once the Supreme Court determines the matter, the current information will proceed or not.

"The prosecution will proceed on one information. The reason we proceed is to preserve the situation we had and have the defendants on bail.

"Because of the serious nature of the offences, if anyone was convicted the sentences would be significant."

Defence lawyer Mr. Scott said: "What you have asked is for an abuse of process (to occur) that is almost maliciousness.

"The Supreme Court has not ruled on it, and until they do, this (new charge) cannot be ruled on.

"The DPP may be successful (at Supreme Court) but the wheel has begun to move in this process, and I say with respect, it ends up being an abuse.

"They (DPP) are trying to get two bites at the cherry. They must hold their position until the Supreme Court makes a decision.

"The Police still have the travel documents (of the defendants). We have a matter that is already in train and this is quite improper.

"The status quo is protected (by the Supreme Court staying Mr. Greaves' decision) and to ask the court to invoke it could be an abuse of process.

"To save embarrassment, the Crown should pull this back, and it doesn't hurt anyone."

Mr. Rayney said the staying order made by the Supreme Court did not say that they should remain on bail.

But Mr. Scott retorted: "They (the DPP) should have asked for the stay and that bail remained. If they fear that we are going to go and get our travel documents, that's not our fault. Go get another order (keeping them on bail) at Supreme Court."