Letter to the Editor: Did Alred Frett get a fair trial?
It is my Fundamental Right and Freedom, as a citizen of the VI to Exercise freedom of my Religion, under section 21, on a news site in the Democratic British Overseas Territory of the Virgin Islands.
I am a proud Catholic, who received the Holy Sacrament of Confirmation [“In the faith of the Catholic Church”] of St. Williams Catholic Church of Road Town Tortola, VI.
With that faith and Freedom in the VI under the authority of the VI Constitution, I call on the Lord Jesus Christ to forgive me for my earthly sins.
Penitential Act (A) The Confiteor of the Catholic Faith: Give me strength:-
[“I confess to almighty God and to you, my brothers, and sisters that I have greatly sinned, in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done and in what I have failed to do (Through-my-fault, Through-my-fault, Through my most Grievous Fault; Therefore, I ask Blessed Mary ever-Virgin, all the Angels and Saints, and to you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God”]
With my faith and the power of the Holy Spirit, I will REPEL all the Evil Forces, who wish Evil upon me for Exercising my Constitutional Rights, in a Democratic VI.
Did Alred C. Frett get a FAIR TRIAL, pursuant to section 16 of the V.I Constitution?
Breaking News: Alred Frett in Hot Water for Publication on VINO. Is it lawful Hot Water?
On Sunday August 18, 2013, I read on the news in the VI that a citizen of Her Majesty’s Territory of the VI, Mr Alred Frett appeared before a Magistrate in the VI, for an “ALLEGED” offence, created pursuant to the Provisions of section 94(1)(G) of the VI Criminal Code:
I wish to give my blogging-views on the matter: This is my Blog:-
The Criminal Code of 1997 is a Statutory Legislation, which defines and Criminalized many offences in the Democratic British Overseas Territory of the VI.
The VI Law:
Offences relating to Judicial Proceedings:-
Section 94(1) of the Criminal Code states [“A person commits an offence and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, if he, (G) while a Judicial Proceeding is pending, makes use of any speech or writing misrepresenting such proceeding or capable of Prejudicing and person in favour of or against any parties to such proceedings; or calculated to lower the authority of any person before whom the proceeding is to be held”]
The Facts:
It is alleged that Mr.Alred Frett, while exercising his Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, guaranteed to him, under section 23 of the VI Constitution Order of 2007, he MAY have committed an offence in the process.
The VI Constitution:
Section 23(1) states [“No person shall be hindered in the Enjoyment of his or her freedom of Expression-
(2) A person’s freedom of expression include freedom to hold opinions without interference, freedom to receive information and ideas without interference, freedom to disseminate information and ideas without interference (whether to the public generally or to any person or class of persons) and freedom from interference with his or her correspondence or other means of communication”]
Note:
Notwithstanding, that a person has these Rights under section 23, there are provisions in 23(3)(b) which declares amongst other things that in exercising these Rights, citizens/residents must be mindful of the Rights of others and the protection of persons before the court and the protection of information heard in court: Good.
So in the process of exercising his Rights, Mr Frett is alleged to have committed a Criminal Offence, under section 94(1)(G) of the Criminal Code, of 1997: GOOD!
How does a citizen/resident appear before a Summary Criminal Court, under the VI Justice System pursuant to Statutory Laws and under the Constitution of 2007?
The Law:
Part III Section 21, of the Police Act, Chapter 165 of the VI Statutory Laws, states
[“The general duties of every member of the Force- RVIPF are-
(a) To preserve the peace, prevent and detect crimes and other breaches of the law
(c) To SUMMON before a Magistrate and to PROSECUTE-
(ii) Persons who he Reasonably suspects of having Committed an OFFENCE or may be CHARGED with having Committed ANY OFFENCE”]
What happens after the Police CHARGE a citizen with a Criminal Offence?
Section 30 of the Police Act states:-
[“Where-(a) A member of the force RVIPF lays an INFORMATION or makes a Complaint against ANY PERSON before a Magistrate; or
(b) A person alleged to have committed an OFFENCE is apprehended and brought before a Magistrate, ANY other member of the force has the same privileges as to address the Magistrate who is TRYING or INQUIRING into the Information, Complaint or CHARGE, as the case maybe, and to examine the WITNESSES giving Evidence as has the member of the force in whose name the information, complaint or CHARGE is laid, made or brought”]
What is the ROLE of a Magistrate in His or Her Criminal Jurisdiction?
Part II-Chapter 44 of the Magistrate’s Code of Procedure Act-Laws of the VI
Jurisdiction of Magistrates:
Section 22 (D) (i) States [“The Magistrate SHALL have Jurisdiction- to TRY summarily and convict and sentence ALL PERSONS CHARGED with Committing offences which he/she is Empowered to TRY summarily by and Act/Law”]
Procedure at TRIAL:
Section 49 of the Magistrate’s Code of Procedure act, Chapter 44-
States [“When the ACCUSED appears or is brought before the Magistrate, the Magistrate, except where otherwise in this Act provided, Shall take evidence upon OATH of Witnesses called in SUPPORT of the CHARGE offered on the part of the PROSECUTION”]
Section 50 of the Magistrate’s Code of Procedure Act states-
[“The evidence of every witness shall be given in the presence of the accused and he or his COUNSEL or SOLICITOR shall be entitled to cross-examine such witnesses upon ALL FACTS relevant to the CHARGE, but not, except with leave from the court, upon matter relevant only as affecting his credit”]
The Constitution:
Section 16 of the Virgin Islands Constitution Order, 2007 States-
[“(1) If any person is CHARGED with a Criminal Offence, then, unless the Charge is withdrawn, the case SHALL be afforded a FAIR hearing with reasonable time by an INDEPENDENT and IMPARTIAL Court established by LAW.
(2) Every person who is CHARGED with a Criminal Offence SHALL—
(a) be presumed to be INNOCENT until he or she is PROVED Guilty according to LAW-
(b) be informed promptly, as prescribe by LAW, in a language that he or she understands and in detail, of the nature of the OFFENCE-CHARGED—
(c) be given adequate time and opportunity for preparation of his or her DEFENCE---
(c) be permitted to defend himself or herself before the court in person or by his legal practitioner the witnesses called by the prosecution before the court, and obtain the attendance and carry out the examination of witnesses to testify on his or her behalf before the court on the same conditions as those applying to witnesses called by the prosecution”]
FAIRNESS: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS-Section 59 of the V.I Constitution:
Her Majesty declared in section 59-
[“(1) There shall be a Director of Public Prosecutions, whose office shall be a Public-Office and who shall be appointed in accordance with section 95.
(2) The Director of Public Prosecutions shall have power, in any case in which he or she considers it desirable to do so-
(a) To institute and undertake Criminal Proceedings against any person before any civil court in respect of any offence AGAINST any LAW-
(b) To take over and continue any such Criminal Proceedings that have been instituted by any other person or authority; and-
( c) To discontinue at any stage before JUDGEMENT is delivered any such Criminal Proceedings instituted or undertaken by himself or herself or any other person or authority”].
Now I ask you the VI Public:-
Did Mr Alred Frett get a FAIR TRIAL under the JUDICIAL laws of the VI?
Generally, as defined by the many pieces of Statutory Legislations and the VI Constitution, when a Citizen/Resident is alleged to have committed a criminal offence, that Citizen/Resident, MUST BE CHARGED, by a Police Officer: The accused Must be served with a CHARGE: The accused MUST appear in Court CHARGED with an OFFENCE: The accused MUST be allowed to enter a plea of Guilty or Not-Guilty: There MUST be a TRIAL, and if after the TRIAL, he is Convicted, then he is sentenced: And after sentence, he MUST be told of his RIGHTS to APPEAL the Sentence!
[“That is how I know the Justice System should operate in Her Majesty’s Democratic Territory of the Virgin Islands-according to Law”].
I didn’t know that because a man is alleged to have Committed a Criminal Offence, under the Criminal Code, and just because the Offence he committed is related to the Court, that the Court CAN cause him to appear WITHOUT CHARGE? And the Court can allegedly Investigate him, for the offence then allegedly CHARGE him and then SENTENCE HIM?
I have nothing personal against the Magistracy and the office of the DPP: I worked with them side-by-side; but this Country is a Country with a Constitution, declared by Her Majesty-The Queen, to protect the Rights of its citizens/residents.
If Mr Alred Frett Committed an Offence under section 94 of the Criminal Code; he MUST be given a FAIR trial under section 16 of the Constitution. Repeat:
HE MUST BE GIVEN A FAIR TRIAL UNDER SECTION 16 OF THE V.I. CONSTITUTION: It’s written in the VI Constitution:
What happens to Mr Frett today, will happen to “you” tomorrow:
I am blessed and protected by the Power of the Holy Spirit, and I am Protected by the VI Constitution: Don’t support my views: SUPPORT THE LAW!
My dear brothers and sister-Tell the people in authority in this beautiful VI, to:
OBEY HER MAJESTY’S LAWS and RESPECT the RIGHTS of HER CITIZENS and RESIDENTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION!
I am afraid that what happened to Mr Frett can happen to me or my friends and relatives-families in the VI.
And it was even Published in the news?
Mr Frett’s name should not have been published because he was not charged with a criminal offence before a court of law under section 16 of the VI Constitution.
I read on the news about a “discussion” in court, about an offence he “allegedly” committed.
Law-is-law-is-law-is-law!
.png)
.png)
Follow Us On
32 Responses to “Letter to the Editor: Did Alred Frett get a fair trial?”
they publish the man's picture big and bold on plat and i hear thinking when the mag say i find you alred liable,i checking wah,alred get a big charge.so law is for big one of society only;no trial,but guilty.what kind of operation is that in our country me so.sue dem a$$$$$ mr frett and the prosecutor saying he will tell dpp.you done try the case without charge and prejudice everything now u'all want to involve cop and dpp..,,wwwww who will hear the contemp charge;;;dem must be putin in russia;;;
By Alred C. Frett
After being threatened with contempt of court and years in prison because of my last article, it must be difficult for those of you who have given me so much support to understand me asking you to restrain from belittling or crucifying the Magistrate… I think she did as she thought fit and I appreciate her lessons and take her instruction to research and educate you most seriously.
His article is there. He went in to say that the law was made to enskaved us, BUT until the laws are changed, they must be obeyed whether are not we like it or not. I understand his sentiments but as the good old saying goes "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse".
@ Totally Amused
You are the one who missed the point. The magistrate put a man who had not been charged with any offence in the prisoner's dock and read out charges to him and further gave him directions on pain of arrest. That is completely improper behaviour of a judicial officer and she should be severely reprimanded.
As for BVI P...m Mr. Frett should sue them for that article. It fits the bill spot on for libel.
WHY WAS HIS NAME AND PICTURE PUBLISHED in the NEWS?
The news quoted the Magistrate,as saying ["She found [parts of the article] to be liable under section 94(G) of the Criminal Code"] A layman person in BVI society,will interpret that to mean:["Alred Frett was found GUILTY for the offence"] The bloggers on the news chastized Mr.Frett,under the impression,that he is now a CONVICTED CRIMINAL in B.V.I.The news allowed bloggers to BLOGG DEROGOTORY things about Mr Frett. Mr Frett is an Honourable citizen of Her Majesty,who served his people with Dignity.He MAY have crossed the line in his article,and I did say that in my article: But because he cross the line,you should SUBJECT him to Public Humiliation,on a news site?IMPLYING to me as a reader,that he was CONVICTED OF A CRIME! I read on the news,["Frett stood in court before the senior Magistrate"] And the news said ["The Magistrate itemized sections of the article which she FOUND to be LIABLE under section 94(G) of the CRIMINAL CODE"].Did you read the word ["CRIMINAL CODE"?] And there was a Prosecutor/Crown Counsel,Representing the DPP,as prescribe for in section 59 (3) of The Constitution.Her Majesty's Constitution also Declares in section 59,that the DPP's presence in COURT is to PROSECUTE persons CHARGED with CRIMINAL OFFENCES,during A TRIAL,under section 16 of the CONSTITUTION: If it was NOT a CRIMINAL TRIAL,then what was the ROLE of Prosecutor-Herbert Potter?During sentencing,the news IMPLIED["That the prosecutor said,VINO should apologise"] Read the ROLE of the DPP in my article.As a Certified Detective and Certified Criminal Prosecutor,I analyzed the News and the Bloggs,and based on what I read,it was IMPLIED to the LAYMAN person,in BVI Society,That there was a TRIAL,and the news IMPLIED,that Alred Frett,was TRIED and CONVICTED for a CRIMINAL OFFENCE!! Who do you blame?Knight Rider?
BLAME THE NEWS:Today is Alred Frett-But tomorrow is you or ME:BLAME THE NEWS!
"WHEN I SAW IT(the article)I WANTED TO BRING A SLEDGE HAMMER".she said that to frett.The news is indicating to us,the magistrate was upset at mr frett. Mr frett might go to far,and break the law of the land,the magistrate is there to dispense justice after a conviction.her job is not to bring her anger and a SLEDGE HAMMER to the court.It is the news that report,how the magistrate appeared ANGRY. The headline in the news should read (ALRED FRETT WAS BEATEN WITH A SLEDGE HAMMER)because I read about a sledge hammer on it way to court, i never hear the magistrate say anything about GUILTY and sentence to HOTWATER.the magistrate can say what she want on her desk,we will give our views in the public.that is what a true democracy is all about. Is the news to BLAME: thanks vino for allowing me to blogggg.
'I am glad the Magistrate gave a alred a chance rather than bringing down the HAMMER-We all do stupid stuff sometimes,but better to give the man a chance to fix his own mistake'.thats was blogged.
you guys are correct,it is the news and the bloggs who identify some kind of big HAMMER inside the court. and every body now thinking that because the HAMMER was not used,mr frett get a break. The blogger 'amuse' blog to say that there was not a trial. ok,then there seems to have been a 'FIGHT'? and frett lost. ac frett was barehands. He received no charge,they claim no trial,but out of a simple dialogue,we read on news about this big HAMMER in court. SUE DEM FRETT: SUE ALL AH DEM. and let them blame the other news who report that you hot water and a hammer there for you..
It was a Public Conspiracy:
Last night,I read on VINO,an article from BRAVE-citizen Mr Alred Frett,as he exercised his freedom of expression and freedom of speech,on a democratic news site,in the free and Democratic Territory of the B.V.I.
I read a question in Mr Frett's article,which asked""Was it a set-up""And his answer led me believe that there was a PUBLIC CONSPIRACY,between Public Officials of Our Judiciary and a Legal Representative of the Crown,to cause a Private Citizen to be UNLAWFUL photographed,and THREATENED with False and Unlawful,Imprisonment,and to Publish his Photo and events of a "QUASI" AMICABLE "proceeding"into the Public's Domain for ALL of us to see,read & Blog! They Publish a "Quasi [private] Matter" for everyone to read and BLOGG.
Now that I have read, I WILL BLOGG on the LAW!
Section 19 of the V.I Constitution,2007 states:"Protection of private and family Life":-
["(1) Every Person has the RIGHT to RESPECT for his or her PRIVATE and Family Life"].
So here we have a Private Citizen of Her Majesty,[well-respected alred frett] walking to the Courts,to Give Support to His son,[as a family] and as he WALKS up the Steps to the COURT,he was PHOTOGRAPHED by a RECKLESS photographer who Published the Man's Photograph for ALL to SEE. Was he charged before the Photograph?
Protection of RIGHT to Personal Liberty-Section 15 of The Constitution states:-
["(1) Every person has the RIGHT to Liberty and SECURITY of the PERSON and (2) No person shall be deprived of his or her personal Liberty--xxx"]
Protection from Discrimination:"Section 26 of the V.I Constitution,2007 states:-
["(3) NO PERSON shall be TREATED in a DISCRIMINATORY manner by any [other] PERSON acting under Written-LAW or Performing the Functions of any PUBLIC OFFICE or any PUBLIC AUTHORITY"]
It was a Conspiracy to HUMILIATE a Citizen of Her Majesty,In Public View!
Do you see the "One-Sided-ness" of our Society? grammer:onesideness is not an grammatical phrase.
They Conspired with the MEDIA,to make Public Example of an HONORABLE and ADMIRABLE Citizen of Her Majesty's B.V.I,and they [The Conspirators] Caused the HUMILIATION to PUBLISHED to the WORLD,and they invited readers to BLOGG,and Because Knight Rider Put his BLOGG, and a DREAM Led him to SEE,Some of you VEX? Well stay VEX!!
Oh I see: You ALL never see Knight Rider Coming to Also PUBLICLY Defend my Fellow Citizen,with the Power of the Holy Spirit and the AUTHORITY of the V.I Constitution?
Her Majesty-The Queen,DID NOT authorize you to HUMILIATE Her Citizens.
What happen to Mr Frett today WILL Happen to " you people "tomorrow:Do not Support LAWLESSNESS in Public Life.
I now call on the Queen's Representative,the Governor to Exercise His Powers Under section 95 (9) and (10) of Her Majesty's Constitution,2007, and take the APPROPRIATE ACTION upon those responsible for such HUMILIATION of the Queen's Citizen:
They Paraded the CASE in the Media,for me to read and Blogg: They wanted us see Alred Frett walking to Her Majesty's Court,nicely ATTIRED; in his Long-sleeve shirt and Tie. I felt bad for the Citizen,and TEARS came out my EYES,and I realized the if Mr Frett was my DAD,I might have lost my TEMPER!
Your Excellency,I reported to you before,about these Level of Lawlessness,towards my People and me,and I also reported FOR THE RECORDS; to Buckingham Palace and Foreign and Commonwealth Office:
Years later,my people are still subjected to Discrimination and Humiliation;despite of "Fundamental Rights and Freedoms" Guaranteed to us by Her Majesty-The Queen!
Don't blame me for my Blogs:Blame the Publishers,who Orchestrated,the Publishing of the case:OK?
Because I was at peace;UNTIL a citizen of the B.V.I was ATTACKED,with such FLAGRANT and BLATANT, DESRESPECT for Human Pride and HUMAN-Dignity in the B.V.I. We respect Authority:Where is their Respect for the Citizens?
Your Excellency;I hereby REFER you sir; to the OTHER NEWS SITE,and you will READ the article,and you will see MR Frett's PICTURE,walking to Her Majesty's Court,as though he is a CRIMINAL!
Print a copy of the photo and story:Take it to the C.O.P and ask the the Commissioner of Police:[""WAS ALRED FRETT EVER CHARGED FOR A CRIME IN HER MAJESTY'S DEMOCRATIC TERRITORY OF THE B.V.I""?] and when the C.O.P will have said ["NO"] you may ask the D.P.P,then WHY was his photograph Published in Public?
What happen to Alred Frett Can Happen to any other Citizen/Resident of the B.V.I!
That is why I am so Passionate about this case!
WHY? WHY? WHY? Why did they do that to Mr.Alred Frett? I want an INVESTIGATION!
An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and enforcing high standards of conduct, and should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. The provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further that objective.