The Tribune

By NICO SCAVELLA

Tribune Staff Reporter

nscavella@tribunemedia.net

FORMER PLP Senator Frank Smith’s bribery and extortion trial was adjourned to Wednesday after his lawyer lamented the “shoddiness” surrounding the Crown’s intent to produce additional documents at such a “late stage” in the proceedings connected to its case against the accused.

This came as Crown prosecutor Anthony Delaney, originally the lead prosecutor on the matter, announced that English attorney Edward Jenkins, QC, would be leading the Crown’s case against Smith henceforth.

Smith’s lead attorney Keith Knight, QC, submitted to Chief Magistrate Joyann Ferguson-Pratt that the Crown’s application to serve the accused’s side with additional information constitutes an “abuse of the process” and could mitigate against a fair trial for his client.

Mr Knight further submitted that if the court were to grant the Crown’s application, it could result in the “entire structure” of the accused’s cross-examination of virtual complainant Barbara Hanna being changed, and that the accused side would likely be “embarrassed” as a result.

During yesterday’s proceedings, and prior to Mr Jenkins’ formal introduction to the court, Mr Delaney told the chief magistrate that the Crown wished to deal with certain “housekeeping matters” that did not concern the public.

In response, Mr Knight said he was informed that certain documents were to be served on the accused, and that given that the matter has been consistently dealt with in the public’s eye, he saw no reason why the Crown’s issue needed to be “chambered”.

After his brief introduction, Mr Jenkins told the chief magistrate that as a result of Mr Knight’s case against Mrs Hanna – that it was improbable for what Mrs Hanna said took place to have occurred –various matters were investigated, one of which resulted in a court order for the production of certain bank documents.

Mr Knight opposed the move, however, stating that doing so would be an abuse of the process and mitigate against a fair trial.

Mr Knight referred to various excerpts from the trial’s December 1, 2017 transcripts, when Mrs Hanna said without prodding that she gave police documents about Pouland Limited, Smith’s company, that the prosecution did not disclose during discovery.

At the time, the prosecution, after having inquired whether the documents were given to the police, reported that investigators said they were never in receipt of them.

Mr Knight argued at the time that if so, it meant Mrs Hanna’s credibility was destroyed. On the other hand, Mr Knight said if the documents were shown to police as Mrs Hanna claimed, its lack of disclosure puts the accused at a disadvantage.

Further charging at the time that the lack of disclosure may mean constitutional provisions on fairness might have been breached, Mr Knight emphasised that the prosecution--which he said includes police investigators--were obligated to turn over all documents, no matter their perceived benefit.

On that basis, Mr Knight charged yesterday that if the Crown’s application is granted, it could compromise the cross-examination process. He also noted that the Crown’s application came at a “late stage” in Mrs Hanna’s cross-examination.

The chief magistrate suggested that the accused’s side, rather than put the cart before the horse, should see what it is the Crown is seeking to produce and then determine if and how it would impact its case.

However, Mr Knight still maintained that on the face of it there is a “certain shoddiness” surrounding how the matter was being handled by the Crown.

Yesterday marked the first day of Smith’s trial since December of last year, when the chief magistrate said based on a doctor’s note, Mrs Hanna would be unable to give testimony for at least six weeks, thus leading her to adjourn the matter.

Mrs Hanna was present in the Nassau and South Streets court complex yesterday, though she never set foot in the court room due to the various submissions from counsel taking up all of yesterday’s proceedings.

Smith is facing 15 criminal charges concerning his alleged solicitation of $65,000 in bribes from a woman he is said to have assisted in getting a contract. He is currently out on $50,000 bail.

He was initially arraigned before the chief magistrate in July of last year charged with 13 counts of extortion and one count of attempted extortion and bribery.

It is alleged that between April 2016 and April 2017, in respect of his duties as a public officer,  Smith demanded and obtained $5,000 per month from Mrs Hanna, knowing he was not lawfully authorised to do so.

He is alleged to have attempted to extort another $5,000 from Mrs Hanna in May 2017.

Concerning the bribery charge, it is alleged he solicited $5,000 a month from Mrs Hanna for aiding her in getting a contract with the Public Hospitals Authority, where he formerly served as chairman.

Smith pleaded not guilty to all of the charges during his initial arraignment.

During day one of the trial, Mrs Hanna told the court that Smith asked her for $5,000 a month after she received a government contract to clean the Critical Care Block at the Princess Margaret Hospital. 

She said within a week of being awarded a one-year, $500k plus contract in 2016, she spoke to Smith who told her she had to give him $5,000. Believing it to be a one-time payment, Mrs Hanna said she obliged and gave him the money. Upon doing so, however, she said she was told she had to make monthly payments in that amount. 

However, Mrs Hanna has admitted to taking out two separate loans from Smith’s lending company, one before she started paying him $5,000 a month and one after she began doing so. 

She also admitted during cross-examination that she called Smith and warned him that he was being targeted, but did not reveal who she meant.