Belizean attorney Andrew Bennett was back in Magistrate's Court today to fight extradition proceedings against him.
The US Government made an extradition request against him back in December 2017. They want him to be sent to the District of Puerto Rico to stand trial for 7 counts of money laundering. As we told you, the American authorities say that they have evidence that he took a backpack containing 250,000 dollars from one of their agents, who was posing as representative of a fictitious drug cartel with Colombian and Puerto Rican ties. They allegedly also have evidence of the conversations between Bennett and this agent about this money, in which it was made clear to Bennett that this organization was looking for a money laundering operation, and that Bennett allegedly offered to provide the service.
Since then, Bennett has been out on bail while the Chief Magistrate presides over the extradition proceedings. The examination of the evidence produced by the US Government to prove its case against him started today, but his legal team has already zeroed in on a technicality.
They say that a key formality, which legitimizes the evidence from the US Government against Bennett, is missing. Chief Magistrate Sharon Frazer listened to lengthy arguments from his attorney, Anthony Sylvestre, to drive home their dispute over this missing document.
When the hearing was done, the press asked him to explain it in detail.
Here's what he had to say about their complaint against the evidence from the US Government:
Anthony Sylvestre - Attorney for Andrew Bennett
"One of the submissions that we had set out in our substantive submissions, and which we commence this morning was one relating the document which were submitted to the court. Under the extradition Act, and specifically the extradition treaty with the United States Government and Belize, there is a requirement by virtue of Article 7 that the documents should be authenticated by an officer of the United Stated Department of States, and the documents are also to be certified by the Belize ambassador resident int he United States. Now, as it relates to the issue of the authentication by the United States Department of State Officer, we didn't take an issue with that. But, an issue that we took was the fact that in the bundle of documents, there was no certification done by the Belize Ambassador to the United States. And that's a very very critical and important point because, as we submitted to the court, and I think all parties appreciate if that is not in the bundle of documents, then that brings and end to these extradition proceedings. So, it's an issue which therefore the court adjourned to allow the Government to see what would be their next step in respect to that."
"In the case of say Belize, somebody is arrested, is charged, and he goes through a preliminary inquiry process. But, when you look at the documents submitted, they don't have certain conditions. For instance, one of the conditions in preliminary inquiries in Belize is that a statement has to be recorded, and has to have certain forms. So, if the statements don't have those forms, then what would happen is that the court will say, well really and truly, there is no evidence before me to consider, and therefore this matter cannot proceed. So, we are in the similar realm of eventuality. No final decision has been made, but it's important to know that this is a very critical point. And we just have to wait and see how, if at all, these matters can be rehabilitated by the US Government in this matter."
The case has been adjourned until May 16, and we'll keep following it as it progresses.
Email
Print