Piarco airport corruption inquiry-FRANCIS JOSEPH Saturday, April 8 2006
click on pic to zoom in
EDWARD JENKINS QC...
‘Who hired Lindquist expert?’
ANOTHER controversy has erupted at the Piarco Airport corruption inquiry. The defence wants disclosure of the documents which were given to American forensic expert Raimundo Lopez-Lima Levi to start investigations into the construction of the $1.6 billion Piarco Airport terminal building.
During his evidence-in-chief, Levi, who worked with Bob Lindquist, told the court that he had received letters offering and, or, appointing him to assist in the investigations into the project. This came out when he was being questioned by lead prosecutor, British Queen’s Counsel Edward Jenkins.
That disclosure did not pass the ears of the defence lawyers. Frank Solomon SC jumped up and said the defence never received those letters as part of the disclosure of documents relating to the case.
Jenkins promised to look into the matter as he had not seen those letters. Solomon was not satisfied with the answer which Jenkins gave. He wanted the court to make an order for the prosecution to supply the letters so the defence could know who engaged Levi to be involved in the Piarco Airport investigations. Jenkins responded, “I will consider their request.”
Solomon said the issue arose because Jenkins led evidence about documents he (Jenkins) has never seen. “The contents of those documents are already in evidence,” Solomon argued.
Jenkins then asked Levi about the documents. Levi responded that he did not have them with him in court. “The standard procedure of the firm is that those documents are in the firm in Miami.”
He said he was willing to make them available to the court.
Chief Magistrate Sherman Mc Nicolls, presiding in the Port-of-Spain Eighth Magistrates’ Court, turned to Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Carla Brown-Antoine. She said the prosecution does not know if the documents exist.
“We don’t know if they exist, if they contain other matters not connected with this case, we do not know what they contain. This court cannot make an order, the Court of Appeal was quite clear about that. If we get them and they are disclosable, we will send them to the defence.”
Solomon responded, “If there are other matters, for instance, national security, cross that out, but we are entitled to the documents. There can be no discretion in the matter, and my application is not premature.”
Mc Nicolls said he would give the State an opportunity to locate the documents and determine if they should be disclosed.
Hearing was adjourned to April 25.
