As Criminal Court Grants Defense Continuance
FLASHBACK: Defendants leaving the court earlier in the trial
By Garmah Never Lomo, garmahlomo@gmail.com
In the ongoing US$100 million narcotic drugs case in Monrovia, Criminal Court ‘C’ Judge Blamo Dixon has granted defense lawyers continuance to enable them review prosecution’s evidence, in other to put up a proper defense on this Wednesday, April 12, 2023.
This is said to be this country’s biggest illicit drug case in recent years.
The Judge’s decision was based on a submission filed by the defense Team requesting court to grant them continuance to consult with the defendants in order to outline the stratify for proceeding.
According to the defense team, the defense was not aware or expecting that the prosecution would test their side of the case at this time and the witness of the defendants are not ready to proceed.
Defense Team maintained that the request is based on the fact that the defense needs time to examine and review the evidence submitted by the prosecution and discuss same with the defendants, especially as to the content of the cell phone and the video clips or CCTV that were produced by the prosecution.
The defense team noted that, “the laws will need comments from the defendants on the content of the telephone and the video CCTV recording.”
In resistance to the application filed, the prosecution said the application for continuance is in total bad fate it is tactic implored by the defense team to being about unnecessary delays in the trial, because they have participated in the trial and travelled along with prosecution while it submitted its evidence to the court, the Jury and the minutes of the court have been available to the defense Lawyers.
The prosecution noted that the grounds provided for in the status for continuance has not been met by the defense. They did not state any ground provided for in the statute whether it is in the section 1.6 of sub paragraph four of the criminal procedure Law where in the basic for continuance is spelled out from their submission, it can be seen as a woefully neglect of their responsibility as defense counsel and only intended to delay the particular.
Prosecution prayed the court to deny the request for continuance and it is further contravention as provided for in chapter 21, section 21.5 of the civil procedure Law as also not been met by defense team as the basis for continuance.
“The submission being without legal foundation but a mere show of unpreparedness by them and to delay this trial should be denied and they should be ordered by honor to proceed to outline the theory of their case,” the prosecution noted.