Murder plot case against four cops is dismissed
By ARTESIA DAVIS, Guardian Senior Reporter, artesia@nasguard.com


Four former policemen accused of planning to break into the drug storage house and kill the officers manning the facility are "fortunate" that their case had not been tried within a reasonable time, a Supreme Court judge said yesterday.

Justice Jon Isaacs prohibited the attorney general's office from prosecuting Chester McKenzie, 51, Keith Patton, 49, Henry Brice, 40, and Stephen Stubbs, 39, on the allegations because an "inordinate amount" of time had elapsed since their arrest in 1992. Almost 13 years have passed since Magistrate Carolita Bethel sent to the case to the Supreme Court for trial. The men were reportedly dismissed from the Force in 1994.

Justice Isaacs wondered how such a serious case "could be allowed to linger so long in the system without being brought to trial."

He continued, "I make no judgment on whether the allegations are true, but the evidence was very strong against you. You are very fortunate to have benefited from the passage of time in this case. An inordinate amount of time has elapsed and the state has failed in its obligation to bring the matter to trial in a reasonable period of time."

Attorneys Dion Smith and Drumeco Archer filed a constitutional motion on behalf of McKenzie, on the grounds that the delay had violated his right to a fair trial within a reasonable time. His codefendants Patton, Brice, and Stubbs represented themselves.

Justice Isaacs dismissed the case without hearing any legal arguments when prosecutor Neil Brathwaite said the attorney general's office did not oppose the motion.

Smith said McKenzie had been committed to stand trial along with his codefendants on August 18, 1995 at the conclusion of a preliminary inquiry. Smith said the delay was not McKenzie's fault and that his law firm had made inquiries about when the matter would be brought to trial in 2006, but the attorney general's office had not responded. He said that the time lapse of 16 years could result in substantial memory loss of witnesses and affect his ability to get a fair trial.

It was alleged that the men conspired to murder unnamed members of the Police Force between September 1, 1991 and April 5, 1992. They were also accused of conspiring to obtain drugs and ammunition, and conspiracy to commit arson. Patton was charged with the attempted break-in of the drug storage facility between September 9 to 10.

I wonder if they will now try to get their jobs back or sue the government for lost wages!!

SMT!!:sparky:

I wonder if they will now try to get their jobs back or sue the government for lost wages!!
SMT!!:sparky:
the case was acquitted, not as if they were found innocent

Murder plot case against four cops is dismissed
By ARTESIA DAVIS, Guardian Senior Reporter, artesia@nasguard.com
Four former policemen accused of planning to break into the drug storage house and kill the officers manning the facility are "fortunate" that their case had not been tried within a reasonable time, a Supreme Court judge said yesterday.
Justice Jon Isaacs prohibited the attorney general's office from prosecuting Chester McKenzie, 51, Keith Patton, 49, Henry Brice, 40, and Stephen Stubbs, 39, on the allegations because an "inordinate amount" of time had elapsed since their arrest in 1992. Almost 13 years have passed since Magistrate Carolita Bethel sent to the case to the Supreme Court for trial. The men were reportedly dismissed from the Force in 1994.
Justice Isaacs wondered how such a serious case "could be allowed to linger so long in the system without being brought to trial."
He continued, "I make no judgment on whether the allegations are true, but the evidence was very strong against you. You are very fortunate to have benefited from the passage of time in this case. An inordinate amount of time has elapsed and the state has failed in its obligation to bring the matter to trial in a reasonable period of time."
Attorneys Dion Smith and Drumeco Archer filed a constitutional motion on behalf of McKenzie, on the grounds that the delay had violated his right to a fair trial within a reasonable time. His codefendants Patton, Brice, and Stubbs represented themselves.
Justice Isaacs dismissed the case without hearing any legal arguments when prosecutor Neil Brathwaite said the attorney general's office did not oppose the motion.
Smith said McKenzie had been committed to stand trial along with his codefendants on August 18, 1995 at the conclusion of a preliminary inquiry. Smith said the delay was not McKenzie's fault and that his law firm had made inquiries about when the matter would be brought to trial in 2006, but the attorney general's office had not responded. He said that the time lapse of 16 years could result in substantial memory loss of witnesses and affect his ability to get a fair trial.
It was alleged that the men conspired to murder unnamed members of the Police Force between September 1, 1991 and April 5, 1992. They were also accused of conspiring to obtain drugs and ammunition, and conspiracy to commit arson. Patton was charged with the attempted break-in of the drug storage facility between September 9 to 10.

This is truly a disgrace.. Why the hell was this case seemingly in limbo for so damned long.. It is obvious these gentlemen were guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:cutie:

An official inquiry may be in order, no? Is there a statute of limitation for this sort of crime? Murder is a capital crime,not true? This stinks to high heaven. Missing files, interference and bribery carn done!

More than likely there were internal forces going on why this matter was not brought to trial in a timely manner. Perhaps the Attorney-General should issue a statement so that the public could be assured that this was only an isolated case and not the norm....

An official inquiry may be in order, no? Is there a statute of limitation for this sort of crime? Murder is a capital crime,not true? This stinks to high heaven. Missing files, interference and bribery carn done!

Everytime a file goes missing the clerks responsible should be charged $10,000.00. After the third time they do 6 months in jail. This should be mandatory. See how many files go missing after that!

If I hear one more time about missing files I'm gonna burn the whole courthouse down!!!!

Everytime a file goes missing the clerks responsible should be charged $10,000.00. After the third time they do 6 months in jail. This should be mandatory. See how many files go missing after that!
If I hear one more time about missing files I'm gonna burn the whole courthouse down!!!!

But then you would burn all the files, and then every case would be thrown out.

But then you would burn all the files, and then every case would be thrown out.
Oh, see how criminals does get in trouble? They don't think da whole ting true.

Murder plot case against four cops is dismissed
By ARTESIA DAVIS, Guardian Senior Reporter, artesia@nasguard.com

Four former policemen accused of planning to break into the drug storage house and kill the officers manning the facility are "fortunate" that their case had not been tried within a reasonable time, a Supreme Court judge said yesterday.

Justice Jon Isaacs prohibited the attorney general's office from prosecuting Chester McKenzie, 51, Keith Patton, 49, Henry Brice, 40, and Stephen Stubbs, 39, on the allegations because an "inordinate amount" of time had elapsed since their arrest in 1992.

Almost 13 years have passed since Magistrate Carolita Bethel sent to the case to the Supreme Court for trial. The men were reportedly dismissed from the Force in 1994.
.


13 Years ?????? 13 YEARS!!! No wonder we are up our eyeballs in crime.

Everytime a file goes missing the clerks responsible should be charged $10,000.00. After the third time they do 6 months in jail. This should be mandatory. See how many files go missing after that!
If I hear one more time about missing files I'm gonna burn the whole courthouse down!!!!

Sorry, are you threatening arson??
Oh, wait, it's ok...I hear there's a problem in the courts with TIMING. ;)

The AG's Office need serious help bey. Every major high profile case they is jack up left and right. I think they have a problem in terms of staff. They cant attract the best and brightest with their meagre salaries. Even the experienced prosecutors they do have they lose to the private sector where they make double the amount of money as they do in the AG's Office. I think if they want to be taken seriously and as a force to reckon with they need to substantially revamp the office. Hell, scrap the office, abolish the post of AG, and create something new. That's what they need, a new image, a new face, something fresh, something new to get them energised and excited to make an elite crime fighting force.
~The rastaman vibration is positive.~

The AG's Office need serious help bey. Every major high profile case they is jack up left and right. I think they have a problem in terms of staff. They cant attract the best and brightest with their meagre salaries. Even the experienced prosecutors they do have they lose to the private sector where they make double the amount of money as they do in the AG's Office. I think if they want to be taken seriously and as a force to reckon with they need to substantially revamp the office. Hell, scrap the office, abolish the post of AG, and create something new. That's what they need, a new image, a new face, something fresh, something new to get them energised and excited to make an elite crime fighting force.
~The rastaman vibration is positive.~


Or, they can hire on contract so that they can plan properly and not be left in the lurch all the time....

Abolishment of the office is not an option...an increased budget, more (highly competant and professional)staff... sure
When you take a public p ost u go in knowing that you are not gonna make a lot of money-and peope who go there or have this attitude of " I een making nothing but a slave wage" have the wrong focus and intentions w / an unfitting agenda and dnt deserve to be there anyway- compensation is more about being honored to render service to queen and country,prestige for the role you preside in (the promotion of justice and holding steadfast the rule of law)...the AG office or the entire judiciary for this fact is no different...what it needs is some good ol fashion self-respect, dignity, and freedom from what appears to be influence peddling and meddling from the other branches of govt. Jmo

Our System encourages corruption because the quality of defense you receive is directly proportional to the amount of money that one has. I do not know what the solution is, save the State contracting private prosecutors depending on the resource base of the Defendant, or getting rid of the adversarial system, or getting rid of Jury trials.