THE glaring absence of 24 of 29 defence attorneys in the ongoing Klansman gang trial, which effectively stalled the proceedings Tuesday, stirred the ire of Supreme Court judge Justice Dale Palmer who, in stating that he would no longer “accommodate” their ongoing tardiness, said the issue might very well end up before the General Legal Council (GLC).

On Tuesday, which was day 59 of the matter, only three defence counsel were present when the judge entered some minutes after 10:00 am. The number rose to 10 briefly and then fell to five up when the matter was adjourned for the day, shortly before 4:00 pm.

The evidence of two witnesses had been extracted, and the prosecution and defence had been in the course of agreeing on the statement of a witness who had been on standby — and had been bound over at least twice before to give his evidence — when it became clear the matter would be stalemated.

Given the sparse numbers and “difficulties” communicating with absent counsel, the prosecution indicated to the judge that it was wary of continuing given that those discussions had “collapsed” and all defence attorneys had not signed off.

Defence attorney Paul Gentles, who was the only senior attorney present, explained that he had been trying to reach out to all counsel concerned but was “having a challenge receiving the necessary returns of those communication” efforts.

Gentles, who said his client had already signed off on all the necessary documents, however went on to indicate to the court that he was not averse to having the witness take the stand while issues with other defence counsel were sorted out.

The trial judge and the prosecution, however, were not so minded.

Said Justice Palmer, “I continue to be concerned… and I believe that I have been exceedingly patient with counsel. I regard it as nothing other than discourtesy to the court if it is that you know that you have a matter, [if] you’re unable to make it for whatever reason, some arrangement ought to be made… [or] that you are at least available to give some guidance on your position.

“So the court must sit and wait on them. We’re now at almost 3:00 pm and every day it’s the same thing. The more accommodation that I’ve given, it seems that it’s met with more discourtesy. Because it means now, because I’ve stretched further and further, it means we can continue to expect of the court that it’s going to continue to stretch. Why should we be waiting?” the usually even-tempered jurist asked.

“I don’t know what further accommodation is required. It feels, even if it’s not intended, it comes across as discourtesy to the court… not even to make arrangements to have someone hold. The number of counsel that are in this matter and only a fraction of them are here now, and no account given,” Justice Palmer continued.

When Gentles “apologised” on behalf of his colleagues the trial judge was unmoved.

“You are sorry, Counsel, but I don’t get a sense that it is either shared, or shown, or prepared to be shown by those who are absent; it is a recurring decimal. It is discourteous, at the very least. You can’t have this matter and when certain administrative things are to be done it’s expected to be verified by the court,” said Justice Palmer.

After the judge rose for several minutes to allow the defence to gather itself, upon his return a contrite Gentles — with still no solution in place — confessed, “We are in a precarious and slightly embarrassing position.”

Justice Palmer reiterated that in a case where there are as many as four attorneys representing one defendant in some instances, it was disturbing that only a handful of lawyers were present.

“That is an unacceptable state of affairs. I generally observe and say nothing… but we’re losing valuable court time and at the last minute we are going to have all sorts of things raised to say I didn’t have an opportunity when, on the record, we have persons holding… Because I’ve been so accommodating, not even the bare courtesies are extended to the court anymore… and I use the word ‘courtesy’ to be polite,” he stated.

The trial judge then moved for an adjournment.

“I really don’t think it’s prudent to proceed without an appropriate indication. The court ought not to be held ransom… Nothing has been indicated to the court as to the reasons for the absence and no arrangements have been made for anyone to hold. Counsel has a duty! It’s not the court that should be sending anyone to look for counsel… There’s no defendant who is represented by only one counsel in this matter,” he chided.

“I don’t like the airing in the public but I really think this is untenable that we should be at a position where we’re now effectively wasting the witnesses’ time, wasting the court’s time, the defendants — 24 of whom remain in custody — while we wait to find out if counsel has any instructions in relation to this witness. It’s an unacceptable state of affairs… It has been getting progressively worse… I am not going to accommodate this anymore. If it is going to end up being a matter for the GLC [General Legal Counsel] it may have to be,” the trial judge declared.

There are 29 defence attorneys, including junior counsels, involved in the 25-defendant matter which began on February 4. On day 39 of the trial Justice Palmer made a similar note of the wholesale absences when he entered the courtroom and saw all 25 defendants in place, the prosecution team, court staff, but only one member of the defence team.

The matter resumes at 10:00 Wednesday morning in the Home Circuit Division of the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston.