State insists on PI for Marcus Bisram case

Jan 28, 2020 News

It was another lengthy session at the Whim Magistrate’s Court yesterday in the Marcus Brian Bisram case. Both defence and prosecution had back and forth arguments again as to how the case should proceed.

Marcus Bisram leaving the Whim Magistrate’s Court yesterday

The prosecution’s representative Attorney-at-law Stacy Goodings from the DPP chambers presented arguments in support of having a Preliminary Inquiry (PI) conducted in the interest of justice.
Quoting section 71A which she noted “seeks to address a magistrate’s role when holding a PI at the stage of a committal…” she argued that “meeting justice is not premised on a short-cut”.
Goodings stressed that “this is a serious crime” and as such they should be afforded the opportunity to have evidence presented and have the main witness testify before the court.
She asked the court to grant the opportunity to proceed by way of PI.
Meanwhile, Attorney-at-law Dexter Todd argued that when the matter was called before Magistrate Alex Moore, who has since recused himself from the case, “over three hours was spent deliberating as to whether 71A should be applied or not… and Magistrate Moore determined paper committal”.
He added that ” the legal argument should be whether you can reverse the order of Magistrate Moore; this case is not a done over matter. Evidence has to be taken. If the order of Magistrate Moore is to be reversed, then the court can only entertain whether it has power to do so, which Attorney Goodings has not addressed”. This he said was “a waste of judicial time”.
Todd questioned the Magistrate on whether there was a notation from the Chief Magistrate in Georgetown when the case was called there that “the orders of Moore be vacated”. To that the Magistrate replied and stated that what should be asked is whether the ruling made by Magistrate Moore before he recused himself from the case, was recorded on the case docket. She stated that checks will be made to ascertain if that was done.
In addition to Todd’s arguments, his colleague Attorney Sanjeev Datadin also referenced the ruling by Magistrate Moore and mentioned that there was no appeal of the decision handed down by the Magistrate then. His argument was to back up their preference to have the case proceed by way of Paper Committal. He too questioned why his client can’t be afforded a shorter trial.
Datadin further stated that “we have all the evidence and are ready to go, we are not saying who you call or not, our position has nothing to do with calling of the witness, it is how, that we are concerned with”.
Magistrate Singh will rule on the way forward on February 10th.