Latest update December 19th, 2024 3:22 AM
PM’s son loses case against teen sister-in-law
– Magistrate cites insubstantial evidence
One month after the teenage sister-in-law of the Prime Minister’s son was accused of assaulting and displaying threatening behaviour towards him, a city magistrate yesterday ruled in favour of the embattled teen citing that there was insufficient evidence to support the man’s claims.
At the conclusion of the trial, Magistrate Geeta Chandan-Edmond indicated that she had found that no prima facie case had been made out against the accused, Tenza Lane, and as such would be upholding the no-case submission made by representing Attorney Onika Archer.
On March 25, Lane appeared at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court where she was indicted on three charges.
Samuel Hinds Jr.
Lane was accused of displaying threatening behaviour to both her sister, Cadet Officer Sonia Herbert and Samuel Hinds Jr. She was charged too with one count of assault causing actual bodily harm to Hinds.
Lance Corporal Jomo Nichols, who prosecuted her case, had previously explained to the court that the incident occurred at their Lot 83 Duke Street residence. He said that Hinds had misplaced a cellular phone and accused Lane of stealing it. A fight ensued between the two. Nichols said that while Hinds reportedly grabbed the teen by her hair, pulled her on the ground, stamped her on her face and dragged her around the house by her hair; she managed to allegedly scratch him several times about his body.
During the course of the fight, the court had heard also that Lane pulled a knife on Hinds and her sister. It was revealed during the first court hearing too that Hinds brandished a gun, cranked it, and threatened to kill her.
Following her not guilty plea, the trial which got underway before Magistrate Chandan-Edmond, ended yesterday with the teen being exonerated of the three charges.
In her ruling, the Magistrate indicated that the Prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused since they had failed to prove the elements of the offence.
She indicated that throughout their evidence against Lane for the threatening behaviour charges, the element of fear was not established by the Prosecution. Elaborating, she said that no proof was brought before her that Hinds was afraid as when Lane grabbed the knife, he told the court that he held his ground, pulled out his gun and cocked it.
This, Magistrate Chandan-Edmond said, proved that he was not in fear for his life.
As it relates to the charge for threatening behaviour towards her sister, the Magistrate indicated that she did not believe that Herbert was afraid when Lane grabbed the knife, since during her evidence she stated that she was “concerned for her sister.”
In response to the assault charge against the teen, she said that there was no proof of any assault causing Hinds actual bodily harm. She noted that no medical report was presented to the court supporting his claim.
Chandan-Edmond ruled that there was no prima facie case since the elements of the offence were not proven. She affirmed that “a jury properly directed at this stage would not have convicted the accused” and dismissed all charges against her.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
The stakes are high in Guyana’s democracy
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- In any vibrant democracy, the mechanisms that bind it together are those that mediate differences,... more
Let the asylum seekers go: a first step for Venezuela to rebuild relations in the Americas
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – The government of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela has steadfast support from many... more
Weekend Cartoon
