The judge for criminal court ‘A’ ROOSEVELT Z. WILLIE denied
THE MOTION TO ADMIT TO BAIL
Ruling :
on personal recognizance because she is a former Chief Justice, former Senator and who has held many positions in this Country and is a State woman. As earlier stated. Defendants relied upon several laws which according to them placed former Defendants who committed Murder or similar crimes on Bail and therefore this Court will not be in error if it did a similar thing.
The Prosecution in resistance and further argument and the Motion for Bail as filed by the Movants/Defendants told the Court to deny the Motion for Bail for the Defendants and they also relied upon the Constitution
Article 21(d)(i) says that
while it is true that all crimes should be billable, there is a prepositional clause which says that “unless the crime being charged against the Defendant or the accuse is grave or Capital” then that accuse personal should not be bail; moreover according to the Prosecution, this portion of the Constitution applies to Cllr. Gloria Musu-Scott as well in respective of her former and present statues.
The Court having listened to the arguments as put forth by the parties will ask a single question. Are these Defendants entitled to Bail? As stated earlier, the principal argument of the Movants/Defendants for which they are entitled to Bail is that the indictment did not substantively charge the Defendants or charged the person who committed the Crime of Murder and therefore proof is not evidence and presumption is not great.
The other question is, is that statement true that the indictment did not charge the Defendants or the person who committed the crime of Murder? The answer is no because the indictment named those who committed the crime of Murder as Gloria Musu Scott, Gertrude Newton, Alice Johnson and Rebecca Youdeh Wisner so the indictment named who committed murder.
This proceeding we are in is not the place to prove who committed that murder or how it was committed because that burden is on the Prosecution.
While it is true that when the indictment has been presented to the Defendants to prove that is on the Defendants, all Prosecution can do here is to debunk that statement and therefore the proper time will come for the Prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt how these Defendants committed the crime of Murder.
The other question that we asked earlier is whether are these Defendant entitled to Bail, we go back to the 1986 constitution, the organic law of the land, Article 21(d)() states
“all accused
persons shall be billable upon their recognizance or by sufficient sureties depending on the gravity of the crime unless crimes of capital offences or grave offences as defined by law”. That unless has a foundation and that foundation is if you are charged with a capital offence or a grave offence, you are not entitled to Bail. The other issue raised by the Movants/Defendants says that ClIr. Gloria Musu-Scott is a State woman who has served in many capacities in this country.
True, but what does the law says, the law says all persons, the law did not distinguish as to who should be bailed when they commit a grave or capital offence.
WHEREFORE AND given THE FOREGOING FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, the Motion to admit to Bail is hereby denied and prove beyond all reasonable doubt as required by our law will be shown when this case is assigned where the Prosecution will be ordered to prove beyond all reasonable doubt the guilt of the Defendants. AND IT IS HEREBY SO ORDERED.
To which ruling of Your Honor, one of the Counsels for the Movants/Defendants gives notice that it excepts and it will take advantage of the statute controlling.
