BVI News

Perjury case against indicted police officer dismissed

Sergeant Marley Sebastien

The criminal charges of perjury and perverting the course of justice against interdicted police officer Marley Sebastien have been dismissed for want of prosecution.

According to the Prosecution, the accused cop was a witness in the matter of the Queen vs Pamphill Prevost and Simon Power; both of whom were interdicted police officers at the time, charged with theft and conspiracy to steal. Prevost and Power were first on trial in 2019. However, that trial resulted in a mistrial as the jury could not agree on the verdict. The retrial commenced on February 1, 2022 and ended a month later with the acquittal of the officers after a no-case submission by the defence.

Sebastien, who has been a police officer for more than 18 years and was part of former Premier Andrew Fahie’s security detail, was accused of giving contradictory evidence to his sworn testimony in the first trial, when he appeared at the second trial of the accused officers.

When his case appeared before the Magistrate’s Court, Sebastien was represented in the matter by defence attorney Valston Graham while the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) was represented by Principal Crown Counsel Kellee-Gai Smith. 

Graham noted that his client was charged without a foundation and argued that the Prosecution claimed Sebastien gave much more evidence this time around than he did in 2019. 

Graham further argued that when the Prosecution first laid the charges against his client in March 2022, they were not in possession of a transcript of Sebastien’s evidence. 

“The Prosecution is claiming that they only received a transcript on Thursday of this week gone, so they charged him really without any foundation,” Graham stated. 

He said senior Magistrate Tamia Richards had previously given a deadline to prosecutors for disclosure of evidence to the defence, but said this was not met. Another magistrate, Khadeen Palmer, later gave a further December 2 deadline to the Prosecution but this too was missed, Graham explained. 

He said prosecutors came with the “same lame excuse” that they just obtained the transcript last week, but this was not accepted by Magistrate Palmer. 

Graham described the Prosecution’s stance as ridiculous and said the same transcript the DPP could not obtain previously, was obtained by the defence from the High Court registry on September 15. 

“The magistrate decided now that she had enough, and she dismissed the matter for want of prosecution,” he explained.

Graham said the Office of the DPP is entitled to re-lay the charges against his client if it so desires. However, he noted that those charges will be met with the full force of defence if this happens.

Share the news

Copyright 2024 BVI News, Media Expressions Limited. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.

16 Comments

Disclaimer: BVI News and its affiliated companies are not responsible for the content of comments posted or for anything arising out of use of the comments below or other interaction among the users.

  1. Fluffy says:

    When are we going to see that the DPP is USELESS?? WHEN??

    Like 22
  2. lol says:

    The head of DPP needs to change from that ignorant lady.

    Like 21
    Dislike 1
  3. Civilian says:

    This charge was utter nonsense from the “get go”.

    Like 14
    Dislike 1
  4. Shameful says:

    Isn’t this what corruption really looks like? When you could use the law to deliberately damage the reputation of other people. You want to tell me that this case got thrown out before it even got off the ground? This seems like it was a spiteful act to me. No real thought was given except maliciousness. This is what happens when you give power and authority to the wrong people. That DPP has to go! The officer should file a civil suit against the government.

    Like 10
  5. Straight talk says:

    They just up and down charging people for charging sake. The real corruption looks like it is in the criminal Justice system and law enforcement. This is where the commission of inquiry was needed.

  6. LOL says:

    Myron next.

    Like 5
    Dislike 1
  7. Joker says:

    This is real wickedness. This is what we wanted a local DPP for? S– is an embarrassment to that office.

  8. Motion says:

    I tell u all tbe woman dont like police she do not she say it bold all the time why have her there police and dpp department is to work hand in hand. But this woman use what senses i dont kno not even book sense she she showing to have. Just being malice and trying a ting. Try wisely not with hate

  9. Accountant says:

    See a law suit for false imprisonment
    Defamation of character and abuse of authority.

  10. Poli e let off the god damn hook again says:

    How long police robbin from street man and so called criminal gwop and dope and guns and keep gettin to f@^& away time and time again but fighting the street who them robbin from!

  11. Dumb says:

    If the government wasn’t so ignorant Valston could have been DPP and do a hell of a better job than that woman who there now

  12. Hmm says:

    No sensible lawyer is prepared to work with the DPP. She only has junior lawyers who don’t stay long, and older ones who can’t get a job elsewhere. I doubt that any other law firm would employ the DPP?

  13. @LOL says:

    And you know he wouldn’t be playing with them.

  14. sigh says:

    If is one thing… our public persecution department is garbage smh

  15. Hooray!!! says:

    Officer Sebastien is a good guy. They tried to tarnish his name for what? Glad I know him personally because if I didn’t, with all the things that’s going on with the police department, I’d think he was just another one of the crooked bunch. But thankfully I know better. God made a way for you Marley! Give Him praise! That’s all!

    Like 1
    Dislike 1
  16. ha says:

    How u get the word good with that man name? You obviously don’t know the d@?!l!!!

Leave a Comment