Central to the defence’s argument is the nature of the evidence derived from alleged WhatsApp communications between Erickson and Almestica. The Crown’s reliance on forensic extraction reports and voice analysis to link Erickson to incriminating messages on Almestica’s recovered mobile phone has been challenged as inadmissible hearsay. According to the defence, this evidence cannot stand under the scrutiny of established legal principles.

The defence contends that a close examination of the evidence in the committal bundle reveals that the purported telephone evidence is hearsay upon hearsay. They argue that the forensic extraction report, which purportedly shows WhatsApp messages linked to Erickson, is a statement made outside of court and is thus inadmissible. Additionally, the defence points out that the statement by Ms. Kim Wharton, who testified to the monikers associated with Erickson, further represents inadmissible hearsay. Wharton’s testimony relies on previous assertions not made while giving oral evidence in court, violating the rule against hearsay as established in R v Sharp [1988] and R v Kearley [1992].

The defence also references the Privy Council decision in Delroy Hopson v R [1992], which underscores that statements made outside the presence of the accused are inadmissible. In this case, any attributed designations linking Erickson to Almestica via WhatsApp messages were made in Erickson’s absence, further breaching the hearsay rule.

The issue extends to other pieces of evidence in the committal bundle, such as the designation of “WestBank” and “BandSpatron” as monikers associated with Erickson. The defence argues that these attributions are based on inadmissible voice analysis and previous statements that Wharton could not testify to in court. The defence cites the Williams v Bedwellty Justices [1996] case, which emphasises that committal proceedings must be based on admissible evidence. Any committal based on inadmissible hearsay evidence is liable to be quashed by way of judicial review and the remedy of certiorari.

Furthermore, the defence points to the principle established in R v Gunewardene [1951] and R v Dennis Lobban [1995], stating that the extrajudicial statements of a co-accused are not admissible as evidence against the defendant. In the current case, any statements made by Almestica outside of court cannot be used to implicate Erickson. The defence highlights that Ms. Wharton’s statement and the forensic extraction report are both examples of such extrajudicial statements, making them inadmissible.

The defence also critiques the methodology and credibility of the forensic extraction and voice analysis. They argue that these techniques are not only subject to significant error but also that their results were presented without the proper foundational evidence or expert testimony to verify their accuracy. This further undermines the reliability and admissibility of the evidence against Erickson.

In their argument, the defence submits that there is no admissible evidence to support the committal of Erickson for trial in the High Court. The statements and forensic reports relied upon by the Crown are riddled with inadmissible hearsay and fail to establish a prima facie case. The defence urges that, in the absence of such evidence, the charges against Erickson should be dismissed.

On February 27, 2023, Erickson was extradited to the United States Virgin Islands after unsuccessful appeals in the local Court of Appeal and in the United Kingdom Privy Council. He was charged with conspiracy to launder monetary funds from outside the United States and unlawfully transporting the funds into the United States. After six months in federal custody, prosecutors dismissed the case against him. Despite this, Erickson faced renewed legal challenges when, on 20 September, 2023, he was arrested in Road Town by local authorities as he stepped off the ferry from the United States Virgin Islands.

Nyron Erickson being whisked out by US Feds under heavy security on February 27, 2023.

The post Nyron Erickson Challenges Committal to Trial in High Court appeared first on Jahphix Television - BVI's #1 NEWS SOURCE.

After a trial spanning seven days, a diverse jury rendered a guilty verdict against the former politician who also faces potential fines amounting to US$10 million. The jurors deliberated for a mere four hours before arriving at their decision. Fahie, who was previously out on bail, was handcuffed and taken into custody.

His journey from the corridors of power to a courtroom in Miami has been nothing short of extraordinary. Arrested on April 28, 2022 by agents of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) at Miami-Opa Locka Executive Airport, Fahie made international headlines, shocking many supporters in his homeland.

Fahie, whose political career once seemed destined for greater heights, the verdict represents a stunning reversal of fortune.

However, as the trial progressed and evidence was presented, the territory closely followed the prosecution’s case which included extensive incriminating conversations recorded by undercover DEA agents, phone records, and testimony from the prosecution’s key witness, Oleanvine Pickering Maynard, who secured a reduced sentence through a negotiated deal.

Maynard and her son, Kadeem Stephan Maynard, found themselves apprehended in the drug sting. The male counterpart also entered into an agreement with federal authorities, resulting in a five-year sentence.

A former mathematics teacher turned lawmaker, he ascended to prominence as the representative for District One in 1999, a position he held steadfastly for 23 years. Throughout his tenure, he wielded significant influence, serving in various ministerial capacities and ultimately assuming leadership of the Virgin Islands Party (VIP).

Fahie led the VIP to a return to power in the 2019 general election, upending the long-standing dominance of the National Democratic Party. His ascent to power was met with both acclaim and scrutiny, reflecting the complex dynamics of Caribbean politics.

Fahie’s once unassailable reputation began to crumble. In November 2022, facing mounting legal pressure and public scrutiny, he resigned from his position as chairman of the VIP and withdrew from the political arena altogether.

Fahie’s sentencing Is scheduled for April 29.

The post BVI Former Premier Andrew A. Fahie Found Guilty, Sentencing Set For April appeared first on Jahphix Television - BVI's #1 NEWS SOURCE.