BASSETERRE, St. Kitts, January 26th 2011 – MANDEFRO ROBERTS walked out of the Basseterre High Court this morning (Jan. 26) a free man after the jury returned a not guilty verdict of all charges brought against him in the Royal St. Kitts Beach Casino counterfeit case.
Roberts was charged with fraud and conspiracy to defraud, but based on the evidence presented in court and submissions by defence counsel Dr. Henry Browne, Justice Errol Thomas directed the jury to return a not guilty verdict.
The prosecution team, which was led by Crown Counsel Garth Wilkin, was also of the view that there was insufficient evidence to warrant a conviction.
“The prosecution concedes that there was no case against him. They don’t have any evidence against Mandefro Roberts and I am also of that view,” Justice Thomas said.
Dr. Browne had made the no case submission yesterday for Roberts, who was jointly charged with Amare Browne and Esha Browne with alleged fraud and conspiracy to defraud the Royal St. Kitts Beach Casino of US$800 in exchange for counterfeit money on February 4, 2009.
Dr. Browne, who raised several points in his argument, said he was making submissions on behalf of Roberts and Amare.
He told the court that the only bit of evidence against Browne is the statement he gave the police, in which he said “someone told him a white man gave someone counterfeit money”.
“Where are the conspiracies between the three? There’s no evidence where the second count could be sustained against anyone,” Dr. Browne said, adding that none of the witnesses had anything to say about Roberts and Amare on February 4, 2009.
“The money was found in cage number four, Esha worked in cage one…no evidence that the accused went to cage four,” he said.
Dr. Browne also said no one came to testify and say that they lost any money, which was missing from the casino and allegedly exchanged for counterfeits.
Chesley Hamilton had also submitted a no case submission on behalf of his client, Esha Browne.
He said there was no evidence from the casino or any witness that complained about anything.
“No one came to say the casino has been wronged; there is no evidence of what is complained of. An examiner of counterfeit may give his or her opinion on the counterfeit. It is a statutory requirement for an examiner to give evidence to validity of US notes,” Hamilton argued.
He further said that there is no evidence of joint enterprise, no evidence to satisfy the charge that Esha Browne was in agreement to do anything and that none of the witnesses gave evidence in terms of the casino losing anything.
“Supervisor of Browne said everything was in order when her shift ended. It would be unsafe to convict based on evidence, based on what is alleged. There is no evidence, no case for the defence to answer to,” he said.
In response to the defence’s submissions, Wilkin agreed that the prosecution did not have much weight in evidence against Roberts and noted the evidence against Esha Browne was circumstantial.
Wilkin pointed out that Williams was not called to Browne’s window to supervise the transaction, which he noted is a normal procedure once the monies are over US$500. This amount, he added is referred to as “doubles” by the casino’s employees.
In his response to Hamilton’s submission that Williams, Esha Browne’s supervisor, said everything was in order when their shift ended, Wilkin also pointed out that Williams had checked the amount written on the straps but not that in the straps and the individual clips.
“The decision related to Esha Browne is one for the jury and should not be cut off at this time,” he said.
Justice Thomas also agreed that the case should go to the jury because of the statement Amare Browne made and the unsigned straps brought into evidence against Esha Browne.
The jury is expected to deliberate later today.
