They face three separate sets of charges for a murder and a pair of kidnappings as well as conspiracy. With the first trial due in just a few months, co-accused Terrence Fernandez and Ashton Vanegas appeared this morning before Supreme Court Justice Collin Williams seeking bail. But after some back-and-forth the judge ruled against them. Fernandez and Vanegas, along with Keiron Fernandez, Ernest Castillo and ringleader William "Danny" Mason, are due in March of 2019 at the Supreme Court, and Justice Williams could not find any reason to let them out before then. The judge also ascribed delays in the hearing of the case to the defense, despite arguments against that. But the end result is that none of the so-called Mason gang is leaving prison for the Christmas season. We have reaction from defense attorney Herbert Panton.
Herbert Panton, Defense Attorney
"He denied the application basically because he says that a trial date has been set, I believe on the 12th March trial date already set and also he found that the reason for not going to trial prior to that was because of delays brought upon by the defense and not by the crown and so based on that he did not grant the bail. However, he has not pronounced on the criminal procedure rules which say that any matter before the Supreme Court must be concluded within 2 years. So that rule is still open for other persons who are incarcerated to apply to the court for bail."
The five were committed for trial in February 2017 in respect of the murder of Pastor Llewelyn Lucas in July of 2016. They face separate trials for the kidnappings of David Dodd and a Mennonite couple two months earlier.
But Panton says the prosecution is not entirely innocent. He cites, for example, the delay in disclosing critical DNA evidence against the accused. Panton does not buy the prosecution's excuse that they were unclear to which attorney - Richard "Dickie" Bradley being the other - represents which man, as disclosure is typically handed to the defendants themselves rather than their attorneys, to whom they will pass it on. Despite the setback, Panton says they will be hiring their own expert to assess the evidence ahead of trial.
Herbert Panton, Defense Attorney
"The epicenter of the DPP's case, the DNA evidence in this matter was only disclosed to us last week and in her affidavit she says that they were in possession of these DNA results for quite some time, but did not disclose them because they were uncertain of which represented accused, which is totally ridiculous. Because you do not disclose to attorneys, you disclose to the persons who are charged to the offence. If she has disclosed those information to the accused and they realize that this is the kind of evidence the state has, they would have moved heaven and earth to make sure that the attorneys were present. But at the end of the day, the petition was not granted, so we moved on."
Reporter
"As you said the trial date is next March, what are your plans until that time?"
Herbert Panton, Defense Attorney
"Our first order of business is to procure a DNA expert to look at the evidence that has been disclosed to us and proceed from there."
Email
Print