By RASHAD ROLLE

Tribune News Editor

rrolle@tribunemedia.net

A SUPREME Court judge has refused bail to murder accused Dominique “Freddy” Reckley, ruling that the evidence against him is strong, the charge is serious, and there is a real risk he may not return to court if released.

Justice Jeannine Weech-Gomez delivered the ruling on November 19, denying the October 28 application filed by Reckley, who is charged with murder under section 291(1)(b) of the Penal Code. He represented himself during the bail hearing on 11 November.

Reckley told the court he had been held on remand for one year and four months and wanted bail so he could see his family and hire a lawyer. He said he was not gang-involved and simply wanted an opportunity to prepare his defence.

However, prosecutors opposed the application, relying on an affidavit from Attorney Betty Wilson of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The affidavit outlined the Crown’s case, which alleges that Reckley fatally stabbed 20-year-old Thyrique Nathan Francis during a confrontation in Sunshine Park around 10pm on 18 June 2024.

According to the affidavit, the two men were familiar with each other and initially got into a verbal dispute. Francis allegedly followed Reckley home after the exchange but returned to Sunshine Park moments later. Prosecutors say Reckley and another man then returned to the park, where a physical fight ensued and Francis was stabbed multiple times. A statement given by Francis before his death was exhibited as part of the Crown’s evidence, along with his death certificate.

Wilson’s affidavit also said that an eyewitness, Clifford Miller, reported being present during both the verbal and physical confrontation and positively identified the person he knew as “Freddy” as the one involved in the altercation with the deceased.

The Crown also relied on a recorded interview conducted with Reckley on July 22, 2024, in which, according to the affidavit, he admitted to producing a knife that was used to stab the victim. The interview was submitted as an exhibit.

Prosecutors argued that the evidence was strong and cogent, that the offence was grave, and that Reckley should remain detained for public safety. They also noted that a warrant of arrest remained outstanding for Reckley relating to a separate dangerous drugs matter, which they said supported the risk that he might abscond if released.

In considering the application, Justice Weech-Gomez emphasised that Reckley is presumed innocent under Article 20(2)(a) of the Constitution. The judge also cited Article 19, which protects personal liberty but allows detention on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence, and section 4(2) of the Bail Act, which restricts bail for serious offences such as murder unless the accused has not been tried within a reasonable time, is unlikely to be tried within a reasonable time, or should otherwise be granted bail after considering all relevant factors.

While noting that no evidence was presented suggesting Reckley would deliberately fail to appear for trial, the judge said the potential penalty for murder raises a real possibility that he may not return to court. She observed that the seriousness of the charge and the strength of the evidence are long-established considerations in bail decisions.

Justice Weech-Gomez referenced Court of Appeal authority confirming that judges should not conduct a mini-trial when hearing a bail application but must determine whether the prosecution’s case appears plausible on its face and whether a prima facie case exists.

After reviewing the witness statements, the deceased’s account, the identification evidence, and the recorded interview, the judge found that the prosecution’s case met that threshold. She said the material before the court shows that Reckley was identified by both the deceased and a witness, and that he admitted in an interview to having a knife and using it to stab the deceased.

She said the incident appeared to be a targeted attack stemming from an earlier confrontation and that the presence of a weapon heightened concerns for public safety. The judge concluded that the evidence amounted to a strong prima facie case and that Reckley posed a danger to public order.

Justice Weech-Gomez said a previous 2022 conviction for possession of dangerous drugs did not factor into her assessment. However, she did consider the outstanding warrant in another drugs case, finding it indicated he may be a flight risk.

The judge concluded there was nothing unjust or unfair about Reckley’s current detention and agreed with prosecutors that he was not a fit candidate for release at this time.