Justice Colin Williams, a former DIrector of Public Prosecutions in St. Vincent and the Grenadines. (iWN file photo)

Director of Public Prosecutions, Colin Williams, says his office instructed that opposition senator Vynnette Frederick be arrested earlier this month.

Frederick was arrested July 11 and slapped with nine charges; hours after a magistrate threw out six charges against her.

Williams disclosed the information on Monday when he appeared as guest on a radio programme.

He said a counsel in his office had full responsibility of the matter involving the senator.

The prosecution team had prepared papers anticipating the outcome of a submission by the defence made earlier this year.

Magistrate Rickie Burnett on July 11 upheld a submission by the defence that the charges against Frederick lacked particulars.

The magistrate threw out the charges.

Williams said that if he is defending someone, and the court is about to give a judgement, he would prepare papers for the eventuality of the ruling going against his client.

“If the judgement is in your favour, you throw them (papers)aside. But if the judgement goes against you, you are ready,” Williams said.

“My understanding is that so too it was in the case of this particular case,” he said.

The DPP further explained that the prosecution was ready to submit the particulars if the magistrate so requested

“But the magistrate said, ‘You all come again then’, basically,” the DPP said in reference to the magistrate’s decision to throw out the charges.

He also responded to the suggestion by some that Frederick could have been summoned to come to court instead of being arrested, which some have described as unnecessarily humiliating.

“Fair enough. That is an argument,” the DPP said.

“But that is a decision that the point persons take — how to reinstitute these proceedings,” he, however, added.

“But it was clear, from my understanding, with respect to those persons who were present at the court house that … the amended charges which were filed, were ready to be presented to Miss Frederick the day that they returned,” the DPP said.

“… I think that the magistrate, consistent with his ruling that there were insufficient particulars, held [that] ‘It’s too late to amend, I think that you bring back your charges’.

“So, I think that there was an understanding, or knowledge or certainly an insight that the prosecution was going to relay the charges,” Williams said.

It emerged during the radio programme that the case was assigned to Assistant Director of Public Prosecution, Colin John.

The DPP said he did not want to be involved in the case because he had recently been the subject of a legal proceeding by a member of Frederick’s family and wanted to avoid accusations that he was seeking vengeance. (Full story to follow)

8 replies on “DPP’s office ordered opposition senator’s arrest”

  1. Mr. DPP why didn’t your office provide the arresting officers with warrants on the day of the arrest? All of this hoopla could have been avoided. I understand that Vincentians love this “Tit for Tat” thing, and would go to the extreme to get back at anyone whom they feel have wronged them; Vynnette is a fine example…but why now? Why disclose this ‘info now? As they say on the streets “all yo love thing nu”.Prepare for the backlash.

  2. The DPP still failed to confirm that they were influenced in any way by the Prime minister. Because Gonsalves as the Minister of Legal Affairs would of or could of had some input or knowledge of what was happening. Ultimately he would not have or should not of been able to order the DPP to do anything.

    I think the DPP his office or someone in his office should be taken to task for wasting the Courts valuable time, playing games at the expense of the court and of the defence.

    If he/they knew what was going to happen because the original papers were not acceptable to the Court he/they should of ensured they were suitably corrected. The Court had sent them away on a previous occasion to do just that, then knowing the outcome failed to act on that knowledge, they pre-arranged the act of applying embarrassment in re-arrest.

    I would describe this as flagrant abuse of the application and use of the law. I still believe whoever designed this procedure did so knowing the outcome and then putting in place an arrest procedure to cause the most embarrassment possible. Perhaps had a good laugh at the office whilst designing the procedure that followed.

    And thank you for reminding us of the matter over Ms Fredericks father.

  3. I have just been reading one of the WIKILEAK release’s that says the DPP is under the control of Gonsalves. I will put together some extracts and let you all see it, with a reference to the document so as you can see the original.

    By the way don’t start shouting at me, they have been in the public domain for yonks, the whole world has seen them.

    Give me a couple of days.

    1. Mojo we understand an indictable offence needs no warrant…but when you dealing with Vynnette Fredericks and crew you better have something. Her lawyers kept asking for a warrant. Why?
      As I said before, this charade could have been avoided. Colin and crew realized the outcome beforehand but acted anyway. Culpability lies therein.

  4. IS IT TRUE THE DPP OFFICE IS IN CONFUSION ABOUT WHO WANT TO BE DPP AND WHO WANT TO TAKE AWAY WHO JOB?

  5. Patrick Ferrari says:

    The DPP said, “His office instructed that opposition senator Vynnette Frederick be arrested earlier this month.” He might as well have told us that the sun is bright.

    But since he ventured the “information,” what are the choices? What other office or offices can instruct for an arrest? What other persons can do that? What Julian Francis said was for nought? Is he trying to defuse Francis’ bomb? Is the DPP taking the rap? Because he can.

    Is it a good-cop, bad-cop play? Or just plain damage control.

    It is like my wife always says. She says, “Patrick, listen to what is not being said.”

    Did the DPP say when he did not say, when he left out “this time” from somewhere in his office instructed sentence?

    What Francis said was a confirmation of what we already knew. It is not reversible and the DPP cannot tell the jury to strike it from their minds. That we must disregard what Francis said.

    We are not in a good place, dread.

  6. Patrick Ferrari says:

    F— the paper warrants. The combat uniform is warrant enough. Ya. Argue with that nuh. You ain’t hear Mr Keith Scotland say that the arrest did not seem to be all good and legal but as it got “more unsavoury,” “DISCRESSION WAS THE BETTER PART OF VALOUR?”

    WHO, WHO – WE KNOW THE WHY – ORDERED IN THE MONGOOSE GANG.

    IF YOU THINK YOU KNOW THE WHY, THE CHANCES ARE YOU’RE MISTAKEN. THEY SENT IN FIVE SSU AND THREE PLAIN CLOTHES BACKUPS BECAUSE VYNNETTE IS A WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION. THE GOVERNMENT IS TO US WHAT THE AMERICANS WERE TO CHAVEZ – THE EMPIRE.

    THAT IS THE QUESTION – WHO SENT IN THE GOONS – THE DPP IS HAPPY WE ARE NOT ASKING. HE CAN TAKE US ROUND THE MULBERRY BUSH WITH HIS LEGALITIES. THAT IS THE REAL CAMOUFLAGE.

Comments are closed.