Prosecution in Nah et al. Plans to Appeal Decision

Elmer Nah

On Thursday morning, Elmer Nah, along with his common-law wife Epifania Caliz, and her brother Manuel Caliz were found not guilty of possession of a cache of firearms, ammunition and bulletproof vests. Senior Magistrate Baja Shoman found them not guilty of the charges after evidence from both the prosecution and the defense were presented. Nah and four other police officers were intercepted on the night of a drug plane landing on the Southern Highway and were charged for facilitating its landing. With all that evidence, what went wrong? Minister of Home Affairs Kareem Musa confirmed to News Five today that the decision will be appealed.

Kareem Musa

Kareem Musa, Minister of Home Affairs

“I don’t make it a habit of delving into the reasons why a particular magistrate rules the way that he or she might rule in any given case. But what I understand from this case is that evidence was produced by the prosecution, by the police, by the prosecutor Miss Alifah Elrington to the effect that those occupants in the vehicle were in possession of ammunition and the defense that was provided by the accused is that he reported back to duty. But from all accounts within the police department, the accused was on official vacation. And so this case, and I am pretty certain it will be appealed, this case will come down to that very point – whether or not Elmer Nah was in possession of that ammunition while on duty, as he is alleging, or when he was in possession of that ammunition while on vacation, which is the prosecution’s case. So I don’t want to comment further on that because that is the legal point that will be determined on appeal. And so, we will leave it at that. It would have been disappointing for me, Duane, if it is that the prosecution did not proffer the evidence that is on the file, the evidence that they investigated in my opinion quite properly and then led to charges. That would have been disappointing for me as minister. But at the end of the day, we have no control over how a magistrate is going to see things, who she’s going to believe on the stand and what versions of events she is going to believe in making her decision. And that’s why I don’t want to question her decision. Again, that is a matter for a Supreme Court judge to look at on appeal.”