Dear Editor,
Ever since the dismissal of the court case involving former junior energy minister Kern Spencer and his former assistant Colleen Wright I have been hearing all sorts of remarks.
Many persons have been toughting corruption, implying that the case was thrown out because of his political allegience; somehow suggesting that the presiding judge is partisan and the judgement is tainted and influenced by his party preference.
To think that such a suggestion could hold water can only be described as preposterous, utterly absurd, or even ridiculous.
Some have even made comparisons between his case and that of Vybz Kartel, crying foul because Kartel was found guilty and Kern Spencer is walking free.
Let me put forward a few fundamental differences between both cases. Firstly, one is a case of murder while the other is fraud; one of the cases was tried by jury the other was presided over by a judge. These two differences would determine how the attorneys involved would present their cases. In one instance they have only one person to convince, while in the other they would have several.
Let us also look at a few points of importance. In a court of law it is all about that which is presented and how it is presented and argued by the attorneys involved.
Cases are also decided or influenced by the mistakes made by one team and if at all that mistake is capitalised on by the opponent. If a key witness is proven to not be believable this also may sway the case in one direction or the other.
Let me take this opportunity to commend Queen's Counsel KD Knight on the way he handled his case. It is my view that they results were strongly influenced by his litigating skills. Credit must given where it is due. I believe mistakes were made by the prosecuting team that were swiftly and skilfully used by the defence to sway the case in their favour.
It is also my view that mistakes were also made by the prosecution the Vybz Kartel murder trial, but the defence in this case was not as alert to use it to their advantage.
On one case the prosecuting team made fundamental errors and in the other case the defence did blunder.
Gary Rowe
magnett0072004@yahoo.com
In law the wiser triumphs
-->
Ever since the dismissal of the court case involving former junior energy minister Kern Spencer and his former assistant Colleen Wright I have been hearing all sorts of remarks.
Many persons have been toughting corruption, implying that the case was thrown out because of his political allegience; somehow suggesting that the presiding judge is partisan and the judgement is tainted and influenced by his party preference.
To think that such a suggestion could hold water can only be described as preposterous, utterly absurd, or even ridiculous.
Some have even made comparisons between his case and that of Vybz Kartel, crying foul because Kartel was found guilty and Kern Spencer is walking free.
Let me put forward a few fundamental differences between both cases. Firstly, one is a case of murder while the other is fraud; one of the cases was tried by jury the other was presided over by a judge. These two differences would determine how the attorneys involved would present their cases. In one instance they have only one person to convince, while in the other they would have several.
Let us also look at a few points of importance. In a court of law it is all about that which is presented and how it is presented and argued by the attorneys involved.
Cases are also decided or influenced by the mistakes made by one team and if at all that mistake is capitalised on by the opponent. If a key witness is proven to not be believable this also may sway the case in one direction or the other.
Let me take this opportunity to commend Queen's Counsel KD Knight on the way he handled his case. It is my view that they results were strongly influenced by his litigating skills. Credit must given where it is due. I believe mistakes were made by the prosecuting team that were swiftly and skilfully used by the defence to sway the case in their favour.
It is also my view that mistakes were also made by the prosecution the Vybz Kartel murder trial, but the defence in this case was not as alert to use it to their advantage.
On one case the prosecuting team made fundamental errors and in the other case the defence did blunder.
Gary Rowe
magnett0072004@yahoo.com
In law the wiser triumphs
-->