Accused army Private claims prejudice, opposes court martial panel

A soldier accused of leaving duty without reasonable excuse told a court martial on Monday that it is common army practice to treat soldiers suspected of committing a crime as if they are guilty, even before the matter reaches trial, as he protested against those sitting in judgment over him.

The declaration was made by Private Raheem Reeves who was at the time seeking to justify why he did not want two members of the sitting panel, including the president, Lieutenant Commander John Mapp, to try him.

Reeves, who is being represented by a team of lawyers led by Queen’s Counsel Michael Lashley, is also objecting to Sub-Lieutenant Jamal Wiggins, a member of the panelin-waiting.

Sub-Lieutenant Alexander Kellman is the second member of the sitting panel to whom the accused has objected.

Reeves is facing three charges, but the court was only able to read one to him because the entire proceedings were thereafter spent trying to settle the final composition of those who will hear the case taking place in the Hodgson Hall of the Barbados Defence Force, St Ann’s Fort, The Garrison.

The single charge alleges that on March 14, Reeves left duty without reasonable excuse.

Having been given his legal right by Judge Advocate Krystal Delaney to defend his objections and call supporting witnesses, the private said there are at least 10 other soldiers who could testify that he is “not lying” concerning the army’s attitude towards accused individuals.

The reasons for the objections were reflected in submissions made by Lashley and statements by the accused that the officers named knew about the conclusion of a previous court martial involving Reeves and therefore were unlikely to purge their minds of what took place.

The accused stated that Kellman was one of a number of officers who visited him while he was in police custody and “he would have cast judgment” on him.

He told the court martial that even before the trial started, certain officers were treating him as though he had been found guilty, prompting him to write a letter to the leadership of the BDF outlining the behaviour to which he was subjected. But Reeves said he has never received a reply to the correspondence.

He also echoed his attorney’s submission that the president of the court martial, Lieutenant Commander Mapp, being a senior officer, would have had knowledge of the prior court case as well as information posted on the BDF’s Facebook page.

Lashley declared that the defence team did not “feel safe” that the accused would have a fair trial because the president would have been aware of what happened at the previous court martial and would have made certain judgments with respect to his client.

The defence also identified Wiggins as one of the soldiers who could be prejudicial to his client during any deliberations because he too, knew about the earlier case.

In response to the Judge Advocate’s question as to whether he wanted to call witnesses to support his case, Reeves named OS Quintyne and OS Murray who are to testify Tuesday.

Under the BDF rules, each individual against whom an objection is made must be dealt with separately before the trial can proceeds.

The president’s matter was handled first.

That was settled with him being allowed to remain in place after the rest of the panel deliberated in his absence and unanimously agreed they had no objection to him remaining as president.

Nevertheless, the president took the opportunity to defend himself against the claims made by Lashley.

Lt Commander Mapp said he was a reserve since 2013 and is not at the BDF or the Barbados Coast Guard daily.

“I knew nothing about Mr Reeves when I was asked to take this matter,” he said. “I had no discussions before, until this morning. I had no discussions with anyone at the Barbados Defence Force and Coast Guard…or other.

“I have not been privy to the information on Facebook.”

The president stated that while he is aware of the BDF website, his information regarding the matter at hand all came from orders from superiors of the army.

He contended that the information was not hearsay or from any publication.

He adjourned the hearing until tomorrow at 9 a.m. so that the objection process can continue, witnesses can be provided and the trial could proceed.

BDF Captain Neville Corbin, who is also an attorney at law, is prosecuting the case.

Captain Natalie Haynes completes the sitting panel while the other member of the panel-in-waiting is Captain Paul Alexander.

(emmanueljoseph@barbadostoday.bb)