Wakanda News Details

2 men facing murder charges told to reapply for bail - Trinidad and Tobago Newsday

TWO men previously denied bail on separate murder charges have been advised by the Court of Appeal to file fresh applications in the High Court under the provisions of the new bail regime.

In separate hearings on January 17, Justices of Appeal Gillian Lucky, Malcolm Holdip and Carla Brown-Antoine advised Chadney Bengochea and Kefente Simmons and their lawyers to make fresh applications in keeping with the amended Bail Act of 2024 as they acknowledged the legal shift brought by the change in the law.

Lucky referred to the Privy Council’s ruling in Kerros Martin vs the DPP on January 14, on the right to appeal from the High Court for bail in murder cases, pointing to two specific paragraphs on the retroactive nature of bail appeals and the application of the 2024 regime.

Bengochea was given the option to withdraw his appeal which his attorney, Peter Carter, did after admitting he was “torn” since one of his main grounds of appeal was not determined by the Privy Council in the Kerros Martin case.

Lucky advised that the point could be raised in a new bail application in the High Court and Carter agreed. Bengochea will remain in prison custody. He is charged with a 2011 murder.

In the second appeal, Kefente Simmons’ appeal was allowed but only to allow him to make a new bail application in the High Court. He, too, remains in custody.

Simmons’ first bail application in 2023 was denied and a second application, determined after the Bail (Amendment) Act 2024, came into effect, was also denied.

The amended Bail Act introduced stricter conditions for granting bail in murder cases, placing the burden on the accused to demonstrate "exceptional circumstances” for the grant of bail.

In Simmons’ case, the High Court rejected the argument that the dismissal of a prior charge against him constituted a "changed circumstance."

Lucky clarified that "changed circumstances" include new circumstances and must be examined holistically.

"The trial judge’s narrow interpretation of what constitutes a change in circumstance was erroneous."

The judges also agreed that by concluding there was no change in circumstance, the High Court judge did not evaluate whether exceptional circumstances existed.

The appellate court found this approach flawed.

Lucky noted, “One could argue that the significant change in law itself was an exceptional circumstance.”

The judges acknowledged that while the Kerros Martin ruling had not yet been delivered when the High Court ruled on Simmons’ bail application, the dismissal of the prior charge was a matter ought to have been interrogated further.

“The issue, therefore, became whether that was a changed circumstance or a new circumstance, and what, if anything, ought to have been the impact on a new, on the second bail application.

“The trial judge found, and really adopted a two-tier approach, that this dismissal of the charge was not a new or changed circumstance, and… ‘was of the view there had not been a change of circumstance to warrant the court moving on to the next step of e

You may also like

More from Home - Trinidad and Tobago Newsday

Michael Steele and Dave Rubin Talk Republicans, Trump, and Free Speech