Israel Bahadoor entering the courtroom earlier today. Photo: VINO/staff

The two are jointly charged with allegedly committing a reckless and negligent act and also with harbouring an unregistered dog.

When the men appeared before the court on October 11, 2012, there were some terse exchanges as Crown Counsel Sarah Benjamin initially made a request for an adjournment on the basis of not being in possession of the notes of evidence.

Magistrate Tamia Richards quickly interjected to say that she didn't understand how that could be the basis of the request put before the court.

Ms Benjamin earlier said that the matter was set for retrial and she had written to the court requesting the notes of evidence. Defence lawyer, Herbert McKenzie who appeared for Brathwaite, was also provided with a copy of the request. Patricia Archibald-Bowers appeared for Bahadoor.

Magistrate Richards then corrected Ms Benjamin, noting that the trial was restarted and was not a re-trial as she referred to it.

The VC in the matter, the court was told, remained overseas for the time being and it was noted that there were issues experienced previously with arranging a video link with the VC to provide evidence.

Magistrate Richards related that the Crown was to be blamed for the recent delays being experienced in the matter. She added that the court was annoyed at the progress or lack thereof being made by the Crown and was especially concerned about the files being shifted around from one person to the next in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Mr McKenzie then sought to offer a chronology of events for the case and stated that even though it was a serious matter, it was also a summary matter and did not deserve to be dragged on for four years. The defendants had initially appeared before the courts since early 2009 after the matter had occurred in 2008.

Amid the shifting of files between counsels and the issue of the matter being transferred from a previous magistrate who has since left the territory, the matter has had to be adjourned on several occasions. The unavailability of the VC to provide testimony, either in person or by video link over the course of the proceedings, had also stymied efforts to have the matter resolved speedily.

Mr Mckenzie requested that the matter be thrown out for want of prosecution while it was noted that today marked the sixth sitting of the year for the matter.

Crown Counsel Benjamin told the court that the VC was still interested in the matter and this was personally communicated to her by the VC. She explained that if necessary she would employ the use of the Evidence Act to have the VC’s evidence heard before the court.

The court had previously been told that Brathwaite was the owner of the dog and had left it in the care of Bahadoor who subsequently moved out of the home where the dog was at the time of the attack.

It is alleged that at the time of the incident, the VC, Ms Christine Sheffield, was in the process of trying to rescue her pet dog that was being attacked by the pitbull, but she was also attacked by the pitbull.

The VC, who was reportedly taken to hospital by persons who came to the scene, was said to have been seriously injured.

In court, on July 6, 2012, it was stated that Brathwaite pled guilty to the charge of having an unlicensed dog.

After listening to deliberations from both sides today, Magistrate Richards said the delays were unacceptable and the shifting of files in the DPP’s office could not be overlooked. She added that the defendants were entitled to trial in a reasonable time-frame but there were issues that still needed to be ventilated in the matter. As such she ruled against the request for a dismissal and said a short date will be granted for adjournment.

The defendants were asked to return to court on October 17.