Court to decide on compensation for ex murder accused

The Crown has admitted that a former murder accused is entitled to compensation after he was unjustly held at HMP Dodds for nearly three weeks.

However, it contended that the almost $1 million that Pedro Ellis is asking for is too substantial.

Ellis, through his legal representative Queen’s Counsel Larry Smith, is asking the court to award damages close to $900 000 for keeping him unlawfully for 18 days.

Back in 2019, Ellis was on trial for murdering Antonio Harewood on May 5, 2013. At the end of that trial, the 12-member jury found him not guilty of murder but could not reach a verdict on manslaughter.

Justice Carlisle Greaves, who was presiding over the matter, remanded Ellis to HMP Dodds while the Crown decided on whether there would be a retrial.

Smith, however, objected to that decision and took the matter before the Court of Appeal, which sided with him that there was no legal ground to keep Ellis.

He subsequently brought a civil suit against the Attorney General claiming that Ellis’ rights had been breached and that he had suffered psychological and mental distress as a result.

On Tuesday, when the matter came up before Justice Shona Griffith, the Queen’s Counsel said his client was seeking $41 300 in pecuniary damages, $642 972 in non-pecuniary damages and $200 000 in vindicatory damages.

But Principal Crown Counsel Marsha Loughseed said the issue was not whether Ellis’ rights were breached, but rather the substantial sum of money he was seeking.

Loughseed said she saw no need for Ellis to be awarded vindicatory damages.

“It is clear that Mr Ellis was deprived of his right to liberty for the period October 8, 2019 to November 12, 2019, by reason of a judicial error. That is not in dispute. It would be incorrect, in our view, to suggest that the Crown would have in any way acted maliciously or prejudicially to Mr Ellis when we were in fact carrying out a lawful decision that was made by a judge of the High Court,” Loughseed said.

“We accept that on October 8 he was to be freed. Regrettably he was not, so we accept Mr Ellis is entitled to reasonable compensation for the deprivation of that liberty, limited, in our view, to the 18 days which would have followed the lawful conclusion of his criminal matter before the court.”

However, the Queen’s Counsel argued that his client ought to be adequately compensated for his detainment.

Smith maintained that the Crown should be made to heal Ellis’ wounds and to give a reason to “believe in the system again”.

“Mr Ellis suffered a lot at the hands of the state in this matter; before the 18 days and during the 18 days. It falls to you not simply to placate him but as far as money would, bind up his wounds and help him to believe in the system again.

“Mr Ellis, by subjecting himself to the rule of the law, to the authority of the State is provided with certain rights and freedoms and those rights and freedoms he must get, except where it is in the public interest or where they may infringe on the rights and liberties of others,” Smith insisted.

After listening to both submissions, Justice Griffith set October 25 as the date when a decision will be handed down.