Selgado’s Abetment Trial Concludes in High Court
Oscar Selgado
A decision will be rendered by High Court Justice Nigel Pilgrim on March eighth, in a trial against attorney Oscar Selgado that concluded earlier today. Closing arguments were made this morning by attorney Adolph Lucas Senior, who represents Selgado in the criminal matter. Lucas put forward to the court that the Director of Public Prosecutions Cheryly-Lynn Vidal compromised a fair trial for Selgado who is accused of abetment to commit murder. Lucas posited that this was done when the DPP attempted to have the Commissioner of Police record a three-way call with her and Giovanni Ramirez who was allegedly hired to kill Marilyn Barnes.
Reporter
“How do you feel about the closing arguments today?”
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal, Director of Public Prosecutions
“I don’t think there any surprises from the other side in terms of what I expected them to come to say.”
Reporter
“He also submitted that Marilyn Barnes had no locus standi to complain before the General Legal Counsel. Does that hold any water for you?”
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal
“What is stated is not actually the substance of the complaint. She did actually have a complaint before the GLC and she had the right to make the complaint that she did. The actual nature of the complaint is not before the court, that was excluded at the case management conference stage.”
Reporter
“He said that you’ve not explained at all what happened to the DPP’s CDs.”
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal
“Tat was also dealt with at the case management stage. The copy of the CD also went missing from the Office of the DPP.
Reporter
“An argument was made likewise that there should have been expert opinion to validate the testimony of a police officer having heard a tape and that wasn’t done.”
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal
“I don’t recall that submission being made.”
Reporter
“Okay, so in terms of the judge accepting the secondary evidence, as well as basing the judgment on hearsay, do you feel that it’s a strong case that the Crown has?”
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal
“We wouldn’t have been prosecuting him if we didn’t think that there was a likelihood that he would be convicted.”
