Eight bail applications for murder granted this year

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

By NICO SCAVELLA

Tribune Staff Reporter

nscavella@tribunemedia.net

ONLY eight bail applications for murder have been granted by the Supreme Court so far this year, Attorney General Allyson Maynard-Gibson revealed yesterday.

Mrs Maynard-Gibson said of that eight, five were granted because the persons charged “were imprisoned for longer than a reasonable period of time.” As such, Mrs Maynard-Gibson said those individuals applied to be released “because their constitutional rights had been violated.”

The other three applications, she said, were granted in less than the “reasonable period of time” that such matters are expected to brought on for trial.

Mrs Maynard-Gibson also announced that to date, there have been 183 bail applications for murder. Of those 183, there were 30 denials, nine variations, one variation denial, one revocation, and seven dismissals.

Mrs Maynard-Gibson made her statements during a Senate debate over the government’s Rehabilitation of Offenders Amendment Bill.

During her contribution, Mrs Maynard-Gibson sought to further debunk the notion that the Supreme Court is a “revolving door for bail”.

Conversely, Mrs Maynard-Gibson said that based on the statistics, prosecutors are “doing a far better job of representing the state in these applications.”

She also cautioned persons to be “very careful about criticising the courts.”

“Year to date, for 2015, there were 183 applications for bail for murder and manslaughter,” she said. “Now when I say applications for bail, I don’t mean obviously there were 183 murders. What that means is, people coming before the courts, they may come several times, they may ask for a variation, etc, so 183 appearances before the court. Of those appearances, there were eight bails granted for murder.

“Now we hear about all these people being granted bail for murder – (there were) eight, eight, Madam President. There were 30 denials, there were nine variations, the denial of one variation, one revocation, and seven dismissals. Now, Madam President, let’s look at the ones who were actually granted bail, and I want to emphasise that we can speak confidently because we keep statistics now.

“Of the eight granted, Madam President, five of them were granted because the persons charged were imprisoned for longer than a reasonable period of time. Now, Madam President, we know there’s no automatic bail for murder when you’re charged with murder. And we know there’s a constitutional right to be tried within a reasonable period of time.

“So when these five were released, they would have applied, either themselves or through their lawyers, to be released because their constitutional rights had been violated.”

Mrs Maynard-Gibson added: “So it is clear, Madam President, that prosecutors are doing a far better job of representing the state in these applications. Only three were granted in less than that reasonable period of time. Eight total year-to-date and of those, only three were less than a reasonable period of time.”

Mrs Maynard-Gibson had previously defended the judiciary after National Security Minister Dr Bernard Nottage shifted blame to the legal system for the country’s crime problem.

“It is very important for us to recognise that if we undermine the respect for the institution, Madam President, by personal attacks, the next step is a slippery slope towards anarchy, and that’s what we don’t want in our community,” she said.

“Now I hasten to add that there is a very big difference between the right of free speech, to criticise a decision,” she added. “Everybody has a right to criticise a decision, and, of course, there is the appellate process to appeal a decision, and criticising the maker of the decision. We must be very careful that we stay at all times on the right side of that line, Madam President.”

Comments

MonkeeDoo says...

Yes, AG. But how many in 2014, and how many in 2013 and how many from June to December of 2012 ? Just the total is fine. Not year by year.

Posted 27 October 2015, 2:14 p.m. Suggest removal

proudloudandfnm says...

The people that murdered my cousin were caught pretty much red handed. I don't care how long they've been waiting. Trial is now delayed so that foreign woman that murdered her husband could get HER speedy trial. Don't come to me about bail for those scumbags. They can rot in the nastiest part of Fox Hill for all I care....

Posted 27 October 2015, 2:22 p.m. Suggest removal

themessenger says...

Only eight? Well mudda sic miss, swift justice at its finest.

Posted 27 October 2015, 3:06 p.m. Suggest removal

TalRussell says...

Comrades I am left in shock that so many of you have more faith in a proven to be a much grossly inadequate justice system, than you do in protecting the presumption of innocence.of ALL persons arrested then charged and jailed.
You must know there are far too many being charged for serious crimes that lacks sufficient evidence to take their cases to trial - yet they must sit locked up in prison cells for crimes they may have never committed.
To condone the imprisonment without bail is to turn a blind eye to a justice system, that you yourself would be terrified to one day place your freedom in the hands of. .
Be careful who you want to lock up - cuz it could very well turn against you or a loved one's freedom.
We need to close down our inhuman jail - NOT spend taxpayers millions build a new one to cage humans like animals.

Posted 27 October 2015, 3:30 p.m. Suggest removal

Well_mudda_take_sic says...

You can't believe a word uttered by this ugly evil creature; she is a certifiable pathological _ _ _ _ _ _ !

Posted 27 October 2015, 4:03 p.m. Suggest removal

John says...

***Year to date, for 2015, there were 183 applications for bail for murder and manslaughter,” she said. “Now when I say applications for bail, I don’t mean obviously there were 183 murders. What that means is, people coming before the courts, they may come several times, they may ask for a variation, etc, so 183 appearances before the court. Of those appearances, there were eight bails granted for murder***.

This is serious ting.

Posted 27 October 2015, 4:14 p.m. Suggest removal

newcitizen says...

You picked out an important part. It doesn't say how many people applied, just how many total applications. Lets say each person asks five times, that's only 36 people, and 8 were granted parole? That's almost 25%!

They are trying to tell a story using only the numbers that make them look good.

Posted 28 October 2015, 11:35 a.m. Suggest removal

Commenters, tell me something please. I have been assuming that the Tribune forwards these comments on privately to the subject(s) in the article. Can anyone confirm ? If not I think we may just be spinning our wheels. I mean if this does not get back to AMG what is the point ? I comment too so.... How can we get the messages to the subject(s). AMG, PGC, BBB, etc. Does anyone think that Tal and birdie take it back ?

Posted 27 October 2015, 4:52 p.m. Suggest removal

Economist says...

I think that you will find that there is someone who works for government is tasked with reading this as it reflects on public opinion. Most PR departments track tis sort of stuff.

Posted 27 October 2015, 9:42 p.m. Suggest removal

DaGoobs says...

This is what I call "rubbish statistics". What is she saying? What are we to make of this? That perhaps as many as 56 persons charged with murder made 183 bail applications for 2015 and of those: 8 applicants were granted bail; 30 applications were denied; 9 who were on bail got variations of their conditions; 1 applicant for a variation of bail was denied; 1 applicant had their bail revoked; and 7 applications were dismissed (i.e., denied)?

What she does not say is what happened to the other 127 applications?

What she should be telling us is that so far for the year "X" number of PEOPLE have made 183 bail applications; how many of them made multiple applications that were either approved or denied/dismissed, withdrawn, not proceeded with, etc. Separately, she could tell us about the numbers of persons who applied for and got/were denied variations of their bail. APPLYING FOR BAIL is way different from APPLYING TO VARY BAIL or the prosecution applying to have it revoked as the first is in jail trying to get out while the second is not in jail but doesn't like or is finding it difficult to comply with the bail conditions. It's wonderful that they are now keeping statistics but the statistics have to provide the public with meaningful information which this story does not do. It amounts to an attempt to provide statistics simply for the sake of appearing to provide information without doing any structured analysis of that information.

Posted 28 October 2015, 11:17 a.m. Suggest removal