The former juror who was jailed last week for contempt of court was ordered released from Her Majesty’s Prison yesterday afternoon after Court of Appeal justices quashed the Supreme Court sentence.
The decision was announced just before 5 p.m. Tuesday by Court of Appeal Justice Emmanuel Osadebay.
He said the justices were of the view that the Court of Appeal did have jurisdiction to hear Lana Bain’s appeal, and ruled that the former juror’s right to a fair hearing under the constitution was violated.
Justices quashed the sentence handed down last week by Supreme Court Justice Anita Allen and ordered Ms. Bain’s immediate release from Her Majesty’s Prison.
Ms. Bain, who had already served just under one week of her 14-day sentence, was speechless with relief after the decision.
“I didn’t think I had a fair trial, and the judge had given me a just case. It was more as if things were just put in place and I never really got a chance to plead my innocence. Today, I thank God that it’s all behind me. I mean it’s over and done with. I don’t ever want to go back there because jail isn’t easy, prison isn’t easy,” said Ms. Bain
Louise Sands, Ms. Bain’s mother, was also elated by the news.
“Well, all I can say is justice has been served. ‘To God be the glory great things he has done.’ My daughter is free. From the beginning I know she was innocent,” said Ms. Sands.
The decision followed more than five hours of submissions from Ms. Bain’s lawyer, Wayne Munroe, and prosecutor Garvin Gaskin.
Mr. Munroe in his arguments pointed to a number of complaints related to the contempt of court conviction.
He noted that evidence leading to the former juror’s conviction was taken in her absence, arguing that Ms. Bain had a right to be present when Wyndham Resort supervisor Dwayne Lloyd testified on whether the former juror knew Brian Beneby, the brother of the men accused of murdering Mario Miller in June 2002.
Mr. Munroe also submitted that the language used by Justice Allen indicated the court had come to a conclusion before Ms. Bain’s summary trial last Wednesday.
He pointed in particular to one area of a court transcript where Justice Allen said “something had to be done about that juror.”
Ms. Bain was sentenced to 14 days in Her Majesty’s Prison by Justice Allen, who found that the former juror intentionally withheld information from the court that she knew a brother of the murder accused.
Ms. Bain was one of 12 jurors who had heard three weeks of testimony in the murder trial of Ricardo and Ryan Miller.
That trial came to a premature end last Monday when Justice Allen discharged the jury and ordered a new trial, before citing Ms. Bain with contempt of court.
In her ruling handed down last Wednesday, Justice Allen said that even though the former juror denied knowing Brian Beneby well enough to make the connection he was related to the Miller brothers, testimony by Mr. Lloyd confirmed that they had to interact in their jobs around the hotel’s pool and beach.
Justice Allen said Ms. Bain had the opportunity to come forward on numerous occasions before the trial began and at least once during the trial, but did not notify the court of the relationship, even though Brian Beneby’s name was mentioned in the first day of testimony in relation to a vehicle – the photographs of which were shown to the jury.
Mr. Munroe, in his arguments on Tuesday, pointed out that Mr. Beneby did not join the staff at the Wyndham Nassau Resort until six months after Mario Miller was murdered, and his car would have been impounded by investigating officers before he started the job.
He also noted there was no evidence to suggest that the car was ever released to Mr. Beneby.
Mr. Munroe pointed out that Mr. Lloyd testified in court that he had never seen Ms. Bain and Mr. Beneby speak and only said the two may have had to communicate, maintaining that Ms. Bain’s answers to questions from Justice Allen coincided with Mr. Lloyd’s evidence.
Mr. Gaskin argued that the Court of Appeal did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal; however, justices pointed out that if Ms. Bain’s fundamental rights were violated, the court could hear her appeal.
Justices noted that the former juror was not given an option to take the witness stand during her summary trial, and suggested that Justice Allen’s questioning of the juror was not an examination in chief but a cross examination.
Sidney Collie, one of Ms. Bain’s lawyers, said immediately after the ruling that he was glad to see the “system work.”
“One of the issues was the liberty of the subject, and while the Supreme Court does have the jurisdiction to find someone in contempt and use the very draconian step of committing them to prison, the appellate court is always going to look at the liberty of the subject, and whether it was necessary to use the ultimate weapon of imprisonment,” said Mr. Collie. “I’m happy that the system worked and the Court of Appeal said very clearly that it was a wrong decision and restored Lana Bain her liberty.”
Justice Osadebay said the panel of justices, which included Court of Appeal president Justice Dame Joan Saywer and Lorris Ganpatsingh, would release the reasons behind the decision in due course.
By: Erica Wells, The Bahama Journal
