Adjournment frustrates long-delayed misconduct case

A Supreme Court matter involving two civil servants accused of criminal deception and misconduct has been adjourned again, drawing frustration from the prosecution over continued delays.

Joseph Nathaniel Sobers, a clerical officer of Pie Corner, St Lucy, and Cheryl Leverne Thomas, an assistant accountant of Kingsland, Christ Church, are jointly charged with attempting to dishonestly obtain $45 000 from Shane Hurley sometime between August 12, 2008 and June 22, 2009, by falsely representing that he was indebted to the Inland Revenue Department in the amount of $375 000 and that payment of the requested $45 000 would satisfy the outstanding debt.

The two are also charged with, being public officers of the Inland Revenue Department, engaging in wilful misconduct amounting to an abuse of public trust by requesting payment from Shane Hurley in the amount of $45 000 for the full settlement of an alleged outstanding debt of $375 000.

When the case was called on Monday, the No. 4 Supreme Court heard that both Sobers’ attorney, Senior Counsel Andrew Pilgrim, and Thomas’ defence lawyer, Sade Harris, were engaged in other courts, with junior counsel appearing for both accused.

Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Alliston Seale SC said: “I personally appeared here today to have substantive counsel be present so that I could get some answers regarding this matter. This matter came in last week, and I was querying how we could get this matter off the ground. No disrespect to the junior counsel at the bar, but I really wanted to hear from those persons who have conduct of this matter so we could determine the way forward…We are no better than last week. I could have given my junior to hold and stayed in the office and do my work. 

“The State, as I said, has been ready for this matter for years and we are no wiser today. Then we will hear all sorts of complaints about delay. It is frustrating.” 

Justice Laurie-Ann Smith-Bovell adjourned the case until September 9, when she said “a decision will be made regardless of who is here for the defence”.

Last week, Seale stated that the delays in getting the trial started were not the State’s fault “at any juncture” and stressed the impact of such delays on the parties involved.

(JB)