Accused dealt a serious blow to attorney/client trust, says prosecutor

A significant breach of trust.

That’s how Senior Crown Counsel Olivia Davis has described the case against attorney Norman Leroy Lynch who is accused of theft and money laundering.

The prosecutor made the pronouncement as she addressed the jury who heard the evidence in what she said was a “long standing matter”.

Lynch has been on trial accused of stealing $50 000 belonging to the estate of Arthur O’Neal Thomas between August 18, 2005 and December 21, 2008.

He is also charged with stealing $407 634, the proceeds of a FirstCaribbean International Bank cheque made payable to Leroy Lynch and belonging to Thomas’ estate between June 22, 2007 and December 21, 2008.

He is also accused of money laundering in the disposal of $457 634, being the proceeds of crime, also between June 22, 2007 and December 21, 2008.

Lynch has denied the three allegations.

Davis, who is prosecuting the case along with Crown Counsel Romario Straker in the No. 2 Supreme Court before Justice Randall Worrell, reminded the jurors of the evidence during the trial and that “not a cent was received” in the sale of the four acres of land.   

She explained that the late Arthur O’Neal Thomas had the wherewithal to purchase the land and he made a will.

“He left it so his children can either have a start in life or a boost in life [but] out of this matter he has not achieved what he intended to achieve. . .

“In this case there was a serious breach of trust because this accused was also the deceased Arthur Thomas’ attorney. In fact it was he who was involved in the purchase of the said land in the first place.

“So when his [Arthur Thomas’] children made the decision to sell this same piece of land . . . they went back to their father’s attorney and that is a significant breach of trust. They didn’t just look in a phone book for him, asking people if they could recommend a good property lawyer. They didn’t have to do that. They knew that he did work for their father and they went back to him. I believe that is most unfortunate in this matter,” Davis contended, describing the case as a serious one.

“It is a very serious matter for the Barbadian public as well. Because most Barbadians aspire to buy land and house . . . aspire to own a piece of the rock . . . and even if a piece of the rock was left for you, you still need an attorney to help you put it in your name . . . you can’t do it alone,” she added.

The prosecutor also reminded the jurors that based on the evidence the accused had received the funds from the sale of the land in his client’s account and that a bank official had disclosed that the account was showing a “zero” balance.

“You don’t need to know what he used the money for . . . It does not matter where he spent it – he could have given it to the church, he could have given it to the homeless and vagrant society. It doesn’t matter what he does with it – it is not his money to use,” she stated.

Lynch’s attorneys Marlon Gordon, Rico Blackman and Michelle Gibson who began their address today charged that the prosecution’s case had “weaknesses”.

Lead attorney Gordon, questioned why “no effort was made” to find out what the money was used for.

“Where is the evidence that he used any money that belongs to the estate?” asked Gordon. “The Crown has not proven its case,” he suggested.

The defence’s address to jurors continues tomorrow.