Court struggles for justice after Fahie’s conviction

Justice Kathleen Williams is having difficulty finding the best solution to a post-verdict conundrum which arose when former Premier Andrew Fahie was convicted of drug and money laundering charges two weeks ago.

A 12-member jury found Fahie guilty of conspiring to import cocaine, and of three related money-laundering and racketeering charges. After the verdict, the judge polled each of the jurors who confirmed that Fahie was guilty of the four charges. She then discharged the jurors. But within minutes after their release, a male and a female juror communicated with the judge, indicating second thoughts about their verdicts, which initiated a rare conflict after the trial’s conclusion.

Federal prosecutors filed a motion this week requesting that the court deny Fahie’s motion to interview two jurors or even re-poll them on their verdicts since he has not established and cannot establish good cause for doing so.

The prosecutors also noted that there was no evidence of a verdict mistake, internal or external pressure on the jury, or racist attitudes toward the defendant.

While stressing that Fahie’s cocaine smuggling conviction carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years up to life in prison, his attorneys argued that the two jurors must be repolled about their verdicts, despite rules preventing questioning a jury about deliberations.

Judge Williams called the discussions meaningful and said lawyers should continue examining past cases in South Florida and around the country to find a just solution.