The Tribune

By FARRAH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

fjohnson@tribunemedia.net

A TAXI driver who was fined $1,000 for assaulting a road traffic supervisor with her vehicle is appealing her conviction.

Bianca Munnings was charged with assault with a dangerous instrument after she was accused of trying to run over a road traffic supervisor at Lynden Pindling International Airport when the woman attempted to stop her from picking up a fare out of turn.

During her trial, a magistrate found Munnings guilty of the offence and fined her $1,000, which she later paid.

Yesterday, her attorney Alexander Maillis II appealed the conviction after arguing the verdict was unreasonable and could not be supported having regard to the evidence.

During a virtual hearing before Justices Milton Evans, Carolita Bethel and Roy Jones, Mr Maillis asserted that based on the evidence of the prosecution’s witnesses, “at no point in time” was there “any chance” the supervisor could have been struck by his client’s vehicle.

He noted Munnings and the prosecution’s witnesses all testified that the supervisor knocked on the appellant’s window, which suggested she was standing on the side of the vehicle. He said this fact was “crucial evidence of the positioning” of the supervisor.

Mr Maillis said it was never Munnings’ intention to put the complainant in fear of being struck by her vehicle and insisted no “reasonable tribunal” that was “properly seized” with the facts would have made the decision the magistrate did.

Insisting Munnings’ verdict was unsafe, Mr Maillis also alleged the magistrate wrongly restated his client’s evidence.

Mr Maillis said based on the complainant’s own testimony, she could have never been hit by Munnings’ vehicle because she was standing on the side of it. He added that he also found it strange that no security footage of the incident was ever accessed, despite the fact that LPIA is one of the most surveilled areas on the island.

He said in view of these facts, he was suggesting the investigation was lacking and the interpretation of evidence was wrong.

In his submissions, Crown attorney Neil Brathwaite stated that “the whole concept of assault involved not the actual battery, but the apprehension of battery”.

He added the fact that the supervisor was not in front of the vehicle did not mean she was “incapable” of being assaulted with it at the time.

He said based on those facts alone, it was “entirely open to the learned magistrate” to find that an assault had been committed.

Mr Brathwaite said the complainant was operating as a peace officer under the Road Traffic Act, so it could not be said that her attempt to flag down Munnings was unlawful interference.

He said the fact the officer was “engaged in appropriate conduct” which was a part of her duties proved the magistrate did not err in rejecting the no case submission.

After listening to submissions from both sides, the panel said they would reserve their decision and notify the respective parties in “due course”.