Prosecution application to have chief magistrate recuse himself in mutiny case is thrown out

Chief Magistrate Ian Weekes on Tuesday dismissed an application by the prosecution for him to recuse himself from the case involving embattled president of the Prison Officers Association Trevor Browne.

Inspector Janice Ifill made the application when Browne’s mutiny case continued in the District ‘A’ Magistrates’ Court, which is currently sitting in the Supreme Court.

About 20 minutes into her cross-examination of Browne who is facing charges of mutiny, Ifill brought the application based on the fact the accused man told the court he believed he was the subject of a witch hunt led by Superintendent of Prisons Lieutenant Colonel John Nurse and that the “system” was out to get him.

She disclosed that because the Chief Magistrate himself served as a member of the Prison Advisory Board which instructs Nurse on the management and supervision of prisons, as well as the welfare, discipline and conduct of prison officers, it was best he recuse himself from the case.

“Section 8 of the Prisons Act speaks to an Advisory Board. This Advisory Board comprises a number of persons including you, the Chief Magistrate. If Mr Browne is saying that he is the subject of a witch hunt and that the system is out to get him then you as part of that Advisory Board can be viewed as part of that system and you should recuse yourself from the matter,” Ifill argued.

However, Queen’s Counsel Andrew Pilgrim, who is representing Browne, told the Chief Magistrate he had absolutely no problem with him presiding over the matter.

In fact, the outspoken attorney-at-law said he would have raised the issue before if it was a concern for his client.

Pilgrim maintained his client strongly believed the Superintendent of Prisons was the person responsible for the witch hunt.

“When my client says he is a victim of the system he is referring specifically to [Lieutenant Colonel] John Nurse. I do not understand that to extend to the Prison Advisory Board or any person part thereof. In any case, if that was his feeling then the application would have been made through me,” the QC said, describing the prosecutor’s application as

“ill-conceived”.

The Chief Magistrate then asked Browne how he felt regarding the application.

“Sir, I have no problem with you presiding over this matter,” was his reply.

However, while he documented Browne’s response, the Chief Magistrate said even if the accused man had objected to him hearing the matter he still would not have recused himself.

He admitted that while he sat on the Prison Advisory Board, because of his position as a judicial officer he would instead have recused himself as a member of the Board in giving any advice to the Superintendent of Prisons related to Browne.

“This is an unusual application at this time, but any application for a judicial officer to recuse himself is a serious application. It should not be taken personally because any person can ask for a judicial officer to recuse himself. The prosecution is concerned that I sat on the Prison Advisory Board and because of that it is not a good idea for me to continue to do this case,” Weekes stated.

“My position is that I do not see a basis for me removing myself. As a sitting Justice, I would not have advised the Superintendent of Prisons on any of those matters because of the nature of those matters,” he added, noting that if he thought it was necessary he would recuse himself.

Browne is charged that between May 1 and May 9, 2018 he maliciously endeavoured to seduce fellow officers David Davis, Ophneal Austin, Shanell Ellis-Vaughn and Stephenson Trotman from their duties by encouraging them to stage a sickout.

He will return to court on August 30.