The US$2 million Sacred Heart insurance scam case had to be adjourned yet again on Monday after the prosecution indicated that its witness was testifying in another case at that very moment.
Police Prosecutor Deputy Superintendent Fazil Karimbaksh reported that he was directed by the Director of Public Prosecutions to proceed with the case in spite of recent revelations that the case was based on a copy of a document.
He submitted, “the evidence would reflect the document that was allegedly used to commit the offence”. He later said that his plan was to continue with the testimony of Assistant Superintendent Trevor Reid but “I am advised that he is in the witness box giving evidence in the treason matter”.
He said another witness – a policeman – was present but it would be better for Reid to finish his evidence before the other policeman, who would be the final witness, took to the stand.
Magistrate Hazel Octave-Hamilton later adjourned the matter to February 28.
The accused, Fred Sukhdeo, and his lawyer Sanjeev Datadin were both present for Monday’s proceedings.
When the case was called last Friday Sukhdeo had made his first appearance since his bail was escheated almost 11 months ago and was placed on an additional $100,000 bail. The new bail was fixed despite submissions by his attorney citing lack of notification of the proceedings.
It was last Friday too, that Prosecutor Karimbaksh indicated to the court that the charge was laid against Sukhdeo based on the copy of a document and not the original.
“I am a bit confused…”, the magistrate said and after reading the particulars of the offence pointed out that there was no mention about a copy of a document but rather about a forged document.
Sukhdeo is accused of being the mastermind behind the insurance scam after the church was destroyed by fire on Christmas Day, 2004. It is alleged that on December 29, 2004, Sukhdeo, with intent to defraud forged a document purporting to be a GuyFlag fire and perils claim for US$2 million ($400 million) for the Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Church. Sukhdeo is also accused of trying to obtain the said sum of money by virtue of a forged fire and perils claim form.
In November 2009, the case was put down sine die (indefinitely) but was revived last December. Last Friday would have been the fourth occasion the case was called since then.
Karimbaksh, prosecuting the matter for only the second time on Friday, said he was advised by the DPP’s Office that the case was brought on the copy of a document.
At this point the magistrate asked him what was the purpose of Gregory Yeadon, an insurance loss adjuster based in Barbados, coming to testify. In reply Prosecutor Karimbaksh said that the witness before – Assistant Superintendent Reid, had stopped his testimony to allow for the document in question to be tendered.
Datadin, who has been representing Sukhdeo from the beginning of the case, was also present in the court for the first time last Friday since it restarted. He indicated to the court that it was untrue that he was practising abroad before indicating the dates that the case was called.
The magistrate interjected at this point stating that notices were sent prior to the matter being called in court.
However, Datadin said neither he nor his client ever received a notice about the court proceedings. He explained that Sukhdeo was out of the jurisdiction 14 times with the permission of the court since the matter was adjourned indefinitely. He said too that there was no effort by police to contact his client’s bailer, to contact his office or that of Winston Murray who is now deceased. Murray was also representing Sukhdeo. The lawyer said that he had been out of the country from July last until the end of that year.
The lawyer explained that each time he travelled his client pledged his home as surety.
“I am asking that his bail be restored. He didn’t know and only learnt of this from the newspapers,” he said. Sukhdeo was released on $75,000 bail after he first appeared in court in March 2006.
The magistrate explained that Sukhdeo’s bail was escheated on March 4, 2011. “I am sorry. There is nothing I can do,” she added after revealing that it was instructed that all sine die matters be reopened and that was how the case restarted.
Datadin then said that he will be filing proceedings in the high court pertaining to sine die matters being revived in the Magistrate’s Court.
In setting the new bail at $100,000, the magistrate indicated that had taken the defendant’s age as well as the age of the case into consideration.
Datadin later submitted that it would be prejudicial to his client if the witness is seeking to produce a document for a witness who is absent. “I don’t see how police can say the case is based on a photocopy,” he stressed. He said the Barbados-based witness, according to the newspaper, attended the court proceedings and “that is where the real travesty lies. They should not have led the witness if he never gave a statement… that takes it over the lines as it relates to prejudices.” He pointed out too that in the light of what has happened the prosecution “cannot admit that there is a flaw and choose to proceed”.
The prosecutor at this stage told the court, “I am now with this case. I am not au fait with what happened last time”. He said based on the advice he had received, there was no original document and the offence was allegedly committed with a copy of a document.
“This is the first time I am hearing this. Why didn’t they say something?” the magistrate said again stressing that this new development has confused her.
When the magistrate asked to see the copy of the document, the prosecutor said he had a copy of the copy, which was met with laughter from those sitting in the court room.
The magistrate then explained to the prosecutor that Datadin was saying that this issue could be prejudicial to his client because there was no statement in file from Yeadon and that Datadin would file a motion which may stop the case from proceeding as it should in the Magistrate’s Court.
“I cannot be putting it down because you are not apprised with what is going on here,” she indicated to the prosecutor.
On December 15, the case reopened with the testimony of Yeadon but his testimony was subsequently discarded after the magistrate found that his statement was not present in the police file.
According to the facts of the case, GuyFlag submitted a bogus claim for payment to its reinsurance agent AON Re and Sukhdeo, who was the head of the sister operation, the National Cooperative Credit Union Limited, was presented as a representative of the church dealing with the fire. It was Yeadon who allegedly brought the scam to light. Sukhdeo was arrested on November 17, 2005 and placed on $50,000 station bail.
Two lawyers, Nigel Hughes and Gino Persaud, had applied to the Director of Public Prosecutions to prosecute the case without success.
