Couple on drug trafficking charge remanded

Aug 25, 2015 Court Stories, Features / Columnists, News

Magistrate Ann Mc Lennan remanded a man and his spouse to prison yesterday after they were slapped with drug trafficking charges.
Hubert Bartholomew, a miner and his 27 year-old spouse Rochelle Gittens of 58 Howes Street,

Hubert Bartholomew at court yesterday.

Charlestown, Georgetown, were accused of having 1.550 kilograms of cannabis in their possession on August 22, at the aforementioned address, for the purpose of trafficking.
They pleaded not guilty.
Police Corporal Deniro Jones, in relating the facts, told the court that on the day in question the police, acting on information, went to the home of the defendants and conducted a search.
Upon arrival at the premises, the police spotted Gittens trying to flush something down the toilet, while Bartholomew was seen throwing something over the wall.
The prosecutor disclosed that after the discovery, the police proceeded to carry out further checks on the home which resulted in the defendants behaving disorderly.
The police retrieved the items and found a quantity of leaves, seeds and stems in a bag. The substance was suspected to be cannabis. It was later confirmed to be the illicit drug. They were both arrested, cautioned and the charge was subsequently instituted.
Attorney Peter Hugh in association with Attorney Latchmat Rahamat appeared for the couple. During his address, Hugh informed the court that he would be making a complaint on his clients’ behalf.
He explained that police in the wee hours of August 22 went to his clients’ home and removed a door. The attorney related that his clients were dragged out of the house and placed into a bus.
Hugh pointed out that while his clients were in the bus the police searched the premises. The attorney alleged that an undisclosed amount of cash, jewellery and several cell phones were removed by the police.
Prosecutor Jones objected to bail because the special reasons raised by counsel were not enough to satisfy the court. He further highlighted the gravity of the offence.
However, the prosecutor’s objections did not stand without a refutation from the lawyer. Attorney Hugh requested that his clients be granted reasonable bail. He pointed out that the defendants would not be afforded a trial within a reasonable time because the prosecution’s file is still incomplete. He also requested that statements be disclosed to the defence if they are available.
At this point, Jones addressed the court and indicated that the file is still incomplete.
Further, the attorney attested that there is no nexus between his client and the alleged narcotic. In highlighting this, Hugh said that multiple persons live at the residence.
The matter will be called again on September 14.