One of the attorneys representing former Petrojam Chairman Dr Perceval Singh in his fraud trial has accused the prosecution of withholding crucial evidence that could help to prove his client’s case.

The attorney, Bert Samuels, made the claim last week after making an application for a no-case submission in the matter. However, he expressed concern to journalists on Friday that he will have to make a resubmission because the prosecution allegedly withheld a crucial piece of evidence that has now been disclosed to the defence when the trial is almost at an end.

“This case has taken the most unusual turn I’ve seen in my own 45-year career. We have had an application to amend an indictment this morning after an issue was raised by King’s Counsel KD Knight. We’ve had all the counts amended after our no-case submission was put in and shared with the prosecution. Except for one count, all the counts were amended when the prosecution saw our no-case submission. I’ve never seen that before in my experience,” Samuels said.

Singh and former Petrojam General Manager Floyd Grindley are on trial in the Kingston and St Andrew Parish Court.

Singh is accused of claiming for overseas trips and meetings he did not undertake, while Grindley allegedly aided and abetted Singh.

The claims, which amounted to more than US$73,000, were made between December 2016 and May 2018.

On Friday, Samuels said that he had made a request for disclosure of a board meeting and disclosure of an entire e-mail because what the defence got was a redacted e-mail.

“I had to make an appeal to the prosecutor who did not agree with me. I had to write to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) and finally the DPP met with her and directed that the disclosure be given to us,” Samuels said.

“In this case we have had to be fighting to get disclosure. The prosecution, in law, has a duty to share evidence, even if it is for the benefit of an accused. It is the protocol of the DPP’s office that there must be disclosure of all material in the possession of the prosecutor. We should not have had to go to the DPP to get this. We begged in open court for the evidence and we didn’t get it,” he said.

“We are very happy for the intervention of the DPP, which caused the prosecutor in this case to disclose to us the minutes of a meeting to show that our client was acting above board when he asked for a refund for a September 8th meeting because that meeting was adjourned to the 22nd of September. But unless we could get the minutes, which we begged for, there would have been no explanation why he made a claim for the eighth of September and was described by the prosecution as making fictitious claims and described by the prosecutor of acting fraudulently for a meeting that he knew did not take place,” Samuels said.

However, he added, “The issue of prosecutorial misconduct continues to be a live issue in this case. It is part of my no-case submission because the law is that the trial judge can be approached to deal with the question of prosecutorial misconduct. We are going backwards, because we are supposed to get disclosure during the prosecution’s case.”

“I needed the disclosure to form part of my no-case submission. My no-case submission is over and this is when I am getting it, now. The judge has invited us to reopen my no-case submission made last week because we didn’t get what we wrote for, begged for, and what we are entitled to in law. We expect when we come back in May the judge will rule on the no-case submission. Whether she will uphold it or whether she will deny it, deny some or uphold some,” he said.

Parish Judge Maxine Ellis is presiding over the trial.

The other attorney representing Singh in the case is Matthew Hyatt, while King’s Counsel Knight and Bianca Samuels are representing Grindley.