Sunday, November 22 2009

Video Conferencing for a Court case was employed for the first time in the Port-of-Spain High Court on Thursday when a Trinidad and Tobago attorney, Mario Merritt, made a successful plea in mitigation to a High Court Judge in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) on behalf of his client, George O’Connor. O’Connor had been charged there with murder. He was freed of the murder charge, but was found guilty on the lesser charge of conspiracy to murder.

Two other persons, Andrew Milton and Dennis Campbell, who had been charged along with O’Connor for the murder of Dorcas Rhule, as well as conspiracy to murder, had guilty verdicts with respect to both counts returned against them on October 7 and were sentenced to life imprisonment with no chance of parole before 35 years, or until 2044. While his client’s being freed on the murder charge, although found guilty on the charge of conspiracy to murder, was clearly an important day for the Trinidad and Tobago attorney, however Merritt entered the history books when he became the first attorney to use the video conferencing facility, at Court Room 19, to present his plea.

Of interest is that a news report in Friday’s issue of Newsday pointed out that Merritt, originally, had begun his plea in mitigation for O’Connor last month in the British Virgin Islands but, however, had to return to Trinidad and Tobago prior to the pre-sentencing reports, which were being prepared. This meant that he had the added distinction of physically presenting his mitigation plea, because of the video conferencing facility, in both this country and the BVI.

Video conferencing for Court cases in the United Kingdom, for example, is relatively recent having been introduced to the UK for the first time only ten years prior to that of Trinidad and Tobago, under the Access to Justice Act, 1999 for civil hearings. Under this Act witnesses overseas can testify, via video conferencing, with the relevant Court providing directions to those participating in the matters before the Courts. In addition, the parties under the Act need to provide formal approval for the employing of video conferencing. On Thursday Merritt strode into history.

What is crucial is that video conferencing for overseas hearings by Trinidad and Tobago attorneys will not only effect a vast reduction in the expenses to the parties concerned, but will eliminate a great deal of travel time in respect of attorneys who would otherwise have had to journey overseas for Court appearances. There is always the possibility, that matters down for hearing, say, civil matters can be postponed on the day of the start of a hearing, by one of the attorneys involved. With video conferencing facilities this potential inconvenience is effectively reduced.

Consequently, Court matters overseas for example for Trinidad and Tobago attorneys which would have taken weeks or even months to be completed as a result of attorneys having to fit travel dates for Court hearings into their calendar would not be a problem with video conferencing in States with that facility. There would be a not insubstantial saving to clients in attorneys’ fees and, therefore, at the conclusion of the matters an appreciable saving in costs would have been effected. Additionally, it would allow lawyers ample time to attend to other briefs as well. All of the parties involved would be more than comfortable with the arrangement.

Within the past few years there has been an increase in the demand for members of the Trinidad and Tobago Bar to practise in several Member States of the Caribbean Community of Nations (Caricom). With the advent of video conferencing Thursday’s introductory use of the facility in the Port-of-Spain High Court appears set to make the names of local attorneys that more familiar in Caribbean Courts which embrace the facility.