THE Janice Allen murder trial of March 2004, in which the prosecution offered no evidence resulting in the acquittal of the policeman charged with her murder, has been described as a case of fraud and conspiracy perpetuated against the administration of justice.

Attorney Richard Small QC, on the affidavit of Allen’s mother, Millicent Forbes, yesterday applied to the Judicial Review Court to quash the acquittal and return the case for retrial.

In his submission before the full court consisting of justices Gloria Smith, Mahadev Dukharan and Roy Jones, Small charged that the acquittal of constable Rohan Allen in the Port Antonio Circuit Court, Portland, was achieved by means of fraud and argued that the verdict was invalid.

“It requires compelling prima facie evidence to show that the court’s processes have been abused and perverted,” Small submitted.

Janice Allen, 13, was killed in a shoot-out in Trench Town between police and criminals on May 15, 2001.

Human Rights groups rallied behind the family and assisted in taking the issue to court.

That marked the beginning of the now infamous Janice Allen case.

Constable Allen was subsequently arrested but was later acquitted after the prosecution advised the court that it could not produce police witnesses.

The case was adjourned 15 times within the four years and eventually took 18 months to be concluded.

Last October, attorney David Wong Ken, representing the deceased family, applied for a judicial review, but chief justice Lensley Wolfe then turned him down.

Yesterday, Small blamed the acquittal on the conduct of certain policemen and urged the court to use its inherent jurisdiction to protect its processes from abuse.

Among the policemen who Small alleged had plotted to deceive the court are, Superintendent Delroy Hewitt, Detective Inspector Linval Dunchie and Inspector Alvin Jones.

He said that at the trial, Jones told the prosecution that Dunchie was abroad on sick leave and from all indications there was no likelihood of his returning as his sick leave was continually being extended.

Small submitted that the office of the Director of Public Prosecution had been relying on ballistic evidence to establish the identity of the person who shot Janice.

“The gunshot fragments taken from her body matched perfectly with the gun Rohan Allen was issued with, and which was fired at the time of the incident,” said Small, adding that the court was later told that the firearm register could not be found as it was destroyed by fire at Denham Town police station.

Small catalogued a series of events including what he referred to as “bribery and terrorists threats” on Forbes, the mother, to drop the case against the policeman.

To bolster his claim of fraudulent acquittal, Small told the court that on May 19, 2001, the police approached Forbes and offered her $150,000 to help with Janice’s burial, adding that four days later two women, one in dressed in police uniform, went to her house and offered her $125,000 to drop the case against the policeman.

“She advised them to give the money to (police) commissioner Forbes and he would know what to do with it,” Small claimed.

“I am appealing for judicial intervention to review what took place. The claimant is saying it is conspiracy, so let’s review the matter and clear people’s names if there are names to be cleared.”

In closing his submissions Small submitted that where such exceptional circumstances exists, it is well within the duty of the court in its inherent jurisdiction to protect its processes against abuse.

Representative from the office of Attorney General Nicole Foster-Pusey will present arguments in rebuttal when the matter continues today.

– whytetk@jamaicaobserver.com