Alrick Smith Case for Malicious Prosecution in Court

Anthony Sylvestre

It was big news in July 2014 when an entire family, seven persons from the Lake Independence area, was locked down after a firearm was found in the home. It was sensational for several reasons – one, that the family was holding a repast for a murdered family member when they were detained, charged and remanded. Two, the all claimed that Police chased two young men into the home, and one of those young men brought the gun with him. Three, it is alleged that the young man, a minor, actually took responsibility for the weapon. But still, the whole, grieving family was locked down for two weeks. The patriarch, Alrick Smith, turned around and sued for Malicious Prosecution and False Imprisonment. The matter was heard today and attorney Anthony Sylvestre explained why he feels that the case is strong.

Anthony Sylvestre, Attorney for Alrick Smith

“It came out in evidence that the police officers all the while suspected that one of the young men had a firearm; indeed he points out that he suspected him to have had a firearm because he was holding his waist. Notwithstanding that, the police officers charged Mister Smith and his entire family and to compound the already grieving state that they were, they were carted off to prison having been charged under the now accepted and recognized draconian gun law which puts all persons who reside at a particular premises to be cast under this wide net and this discriminatory web which is a most unfortunate situation, as Mister Smith can certain attest to. And so we’ve finished the trial of the matter. There were five witnesses for the claimant, Mister Smith and the five persons who were charged; those being his wife Miss Sandra Casey, his son Leon Smith, his daughter Tamika Smith and his niece Isheida Brooks. And for the defendant, we had the arresting officer, Mister Castellanos and the other officer. We are now at the stage where we will be making legal submissions to the judge tomorrow afternoon as it relates to the legal requirements for proof, which we are claiming took place; those being false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. So that will take place tomorrow afternoon. But you were in court this morning and you’d see that the matter did proceed very quickly and I must say that in relation to the tort of malicious prosecution, what needs to be told is that they were charged; the charge was dismissed and the police officers at the time that there was no reasonable basis for the charge to have been brought and that goes along with the fact that there would have been malice. If you have no reasonable basis to charge somebody then it is imputed that it is based on malice. So those are the basis in which we brought the claim for malicious prosecution and also the claim for false imprisonment because they are both tied together.”

Alrick Smith

Alrick Smith, Suing Government

“I just want justice to prevail for me because this is a malice thing they do we.”

Reporter

“You believed they had no reason to bring those charges?”

Alrick Smith

“No reason to bring those charges at me. We mi di have a repast and the police man told a lot of lies too.”

The case continues on Wednesday.