National Security Minister, Wayne Munroe says The Bahamas government is unified in wanting to send the clearest possible message to adults who would have sexual relationships with children

The Bahamas National Security Minister, Wayne Munroe: Our government is unified in wanting to send the clearest possible message to adults who would have sexual relationships with children under 16: your behavior will land you in jail, no matter the child’s behavior  

“I have spoken several times on the matter of a plea agreement and I deeply regret that my answers have caused concern.  I gave several interviews and I hope that pulling the salient points together in one place can be helpful to understanding my position:

#1 Anyone who has sexual intercourse with a child under 16 is disordered.

#2 Anyone who does so will go to prison.  The only question is the length of their sentence.

#3 Sentence lengths for the offence in question are established by the Bahamas Court of Appeal.  For a first-time offender, the sentence is 7 years if the young woman does not consent, and 4 years if the young woman does consent.  The word “consent” is in the text of the relevant statute – “with or without consent”.

#4 Plea agreements avoid court cases and thus help clear the backlog of cases in our justice system.  Additionally, plea bargaining spares the victim from having to give evidence thereby being forced to relive the trauma of the crime.

#Our government is unified in wanting to send the clearest possible message to adults who would have sexual relationships with children under 16: your behavior will land you in jail, no matter the child’s behavior.

#When I provide my analysis of a legal matter, as I have done in recent interviews, I do draw upon my decades of experience practicing law.  But I want Bahamians to be clear, it is this experience that allows me a clear view of the path to successful law enforcement and prosecution.  The goal in cases like these is to punish predatory behavior and to deter others from engaging in such behavior.”

#EARLIER STORY:

#By EARYEL BOWLEG

#Tribune Staff Reporter

#ebowleg@tribunemedia.net

#NATIONAL Security Minister Wayne Munroe suggested yesterday that a 40-year-old man convicted of having unlawful sex with a 14-year-old girl received a sentence that was too severe, saying had he defended the case he would have argued it was not rape and that the girl consented.

#His remarks prompted swift backlash from Free National Movement Deputy Leader Shanendon Cartwright and others.  Some activists have called on him to be fired.

#Mr Munroe said he did not have all facts of the case, but told reporters he did not understand the controversy surrounding the sentence and anger about subsequent comments made by a prosecutor about the case.

#“If I was advising the accused and somebody gets seven years for raping somebody I wouldn’t have been advising my client to agree to four years for unlawful intercourse because I would say that if we go to court you would say to the judge ‘he didn’t rape her - she consented’.  The fact is in law her consent is neither here nor there.  If I was the defence counsel I wouldn’t have accepted a plea deal with that high a level of penalty and we would have gone to court,” he told reporters.

#Earlier in the interview, Mr Munroe said sentencing guidelines for rape differ depending whether the victim is a “virgin” or a “prostitute”.

#“If you were to rape a virgin, if you raped a prostitute, both are rape, you’re likely to be awarded a higher sentence for raping a nun than raping a prostitute,” the former defence attorney said.  “That’s just what the case law says because you consider the impact of the offence and considering the impact of the offence you consider victim impact.  So that’s a part of sentencing.”

#His comments came when he was asked by reporters about Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Franklyn Williams’ statements about a plea deal the convict received, which resulted in him getting four years in prison and three years’ probation upon release.

#When contacted about the case, Mr Williams told a reporter on Wednesday: “We have a generation of highly sexualised young people, whether through media or association, and who because of parental inattention, lack of parental oversight and in some cases, tacit encouragement and acquiescence, engage in risky behaviours.  The facts of this case dictated the course taken.”

#He later said he was not victim blaming, however.

#Mr Munroe said he was trying to understand “controversy” about the case.

#When told the offence was unlawful sexual intercourse, he said: “Which means that it’s not rape.  Which means you are punished because as a big man you shouldn’t be having sex with anybody under 16.  If the person under 16, if you force them, they would still charge you with sex with somebody under 16 but the sentencing court would say that you forced this person, they didn’t initiate it, so you will get a higher sentence than somebody who initiates it with you.  The general sentence for rape where the person isn’t consenting is seven years.”

#Some observers accused Mr Williams of “victim blaming” and called for his resignation.

#Asked to respond, Mr Munroe disagreed with that interpretation, saying “How is that victim blaming?”

#He also said: “Yes she can give consent.  You can consent from seven years old.  It’s just that law says if you are under 16, if you read the offence having sexual intercourse with somebody under 16 with or without their consent which tells you that the person can consent.  Just that in law, we say it doesn’t matter.  If it doesn’t matter having sex with (a) 16-year-old whether she consents or she doesn’t consent that being the case since that offence has those two possibilities, the victim consent or the victim doesn’t consent.  Who would believe that the sentence should be the same whether the victim consents it should be same when the victim doesn’t consent.  One would hope that you would get a higher sentence when the victim doesn’t consent.”

#According to published reports about the case, the girl and the man met on Facebook and met up to have sex multiple time over the course of several months.  Police found the girl at the man’s home after an anonymous tip in early 2020 and met her putting on her school uniform.  The child was examined at the hospital and where it was discovered she was pregnant.

#In a statement issued yesterday, the FNM’s deputy leader said Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis needs to rein Mr Munroe in.

“I join with all right-thinking Bahamians in condemning the utterances of Minister of National Security Wayne Munroe with regard to how the law should be interpreted with regard to adults who prey on underage girls,” Mr Cartwright said.

#“His opinions on consent are repugnant and have no place in a civilised country.  What the minister should be doing as a lawmaker is advocating for stronger laws to protect children, and a no tolerance approach as the minister of national security, as opposed to alerting child predators as to how they can beat the system.

#“If he cannot advocate on behalf of protecting children and law-abiding citizens, then he should reconsider his current career choice.”

Source/Comment

Shanendon Cartwright, Deputy Leader of the Official Opposition - Free National Movement - FNM, Condemns National Security Minister Wayne Munroe public utterances on how the law should be interpreted with regard to adults who prey on underage girls

FNM DEPUTY URGES PM TO "REIGN IN" NATIONAL SECURITY MINISTER

I join with all right-thinking Bahamians in condemning the utterances of Minister of National Security Wayne Munroe with regard to how the law should be interpreted with regard to adults who prey on underage girls.

His opinions on consent are repugnant and have no place in a civilized country.

What the minister should be doing as a lawmaker is advocating for stronger laws to protect children, and a no tolerance approach as the minister of national security, as opposed to alerting child predators as to how they can beat the system.

If he cannot advocate on behalf of protecting children and law abiding citizens, then he should reconsider his current career choice.

The prime minister must urgently reign his national security minister in.

Shanendon Cartwright, M.P.

Deputy Leader

The Free National Movement

Wayne Munroe - Defense Counsel or Minister of National Security?

Wayne Munroe Q.C., - Defense Attorney or Minister of National Security?

From Free National Movement (FNM) Chairman, Carl R Culmer Sr

The great Defense Attorney Wayne Munroe Q.C. must take off his litigious hat, and remember that he is the Minister of National Security, and govern himself accordingly. It is unacceptable for the Minister of National Security to openly comment on an active investigation of a police involved shooting, particularly when the deceased was also a member of the Armed Forces under the Minister’s remit.

The careless commentary preempts the official investigation and prejudices the Coroners inquest proceedings. The Minister should not recklessly and arrogantly make himself the Judge and Jury on the veracity of the body-cam footage. The Minister’s assertion that the footage is “consistent” with anyone’s statement can only properly come after a thorough formal investigation. We are confident that the process and protocols established for police involved shootings are sufficient to determining issues of facts.

This is not the first time that Minister Munroe has done this. Minister Munroe must refrain from making premature remarks, stop interfering with this and any investigation - and let the Professional Public Servants do their jobs.

If the Minister insists and continues acting as Defense Counsel, he should take up the cause of the wrongfully terminated Urban Renewal workers, and the many other Bahamians who find themselves unjustly affected by the government’s reckless and harsh handling of hard working Bahamians.

We in the Free National Movement extend our condolences to the family of Defense Force Officer, Leading Seaman, Rodney Adderley, his colleagues and to all those affected by this tragic and unfortunate incident.

Election court lawyers want $400,000 from Parliamentary Commissioner Errol Bethel and defeated Free National Movement candidate Dr. Duane Sands

Election court lawyers want $400,000
By JUAN MCCARTNEY ~ Guardian Senior Reporter ~ juan@nasguard.com:



An already cash-strapped Public Treasury will be asked to cough up hundreds of thousands of dollars, as the attorneys who represented Progressive Liberal Party Member of Parliament Ryan Pinder in the Elizabeth Election Court challenge earlier this year will ask for more than $400,000 from Parliamentary Commissioner Errol Bethel and defeated Free National Movement candidate Dr. Duane Sands.

The court costs will be comprised of a $357,000 bill for the actual court proceedings, and a $28,700 bill for services rendered involving Sands' unsuccessful bid to have Pinder's Election Court petition thrown out before the actual proceedings began, according to Wayne Munroe, one of the attorneys who represented Pinder.

On March 23 Election Court Senior Justices Anita Allen and John Isaacs ruled Pinder the winner of the challenge and ordered Bethel to pay 75 percent of Pinder's costs, with Sands responsible for the remaining 25 percent.

Pinder's lead counsel was Philip Brave Davis. He was assisted by Munroe, Valentine Grimes and Keod Smith.

Munroe said the bill for the strike out petition has been filed for some time, but the bill for the court proceedings will be filed today - the last day Munroe has to do so without asking for an extension.

The Supreme Court Registrar will then go over the bills item by item and decide if any alterations should be made.

Sands and Bethel are now faced with a bill $100,000 higher than they could have settled for.

Munroe said that Pinder's legal team offered Bethel and Sands' respective counsels an offer to settle the strike out bill at $20,000.

He added that Bethel and Sands' were also offered to settle the court proceedings at $275,000 but refused both offers.

Elizabeth Returning Officer (and Director of Immigration) Jack Thompson was also named as a respondent in the by-election court challenge, but was not ordered to pay costs.

The February 16 by-election ended with Sands receiving 1,501 votes to Pinder's 1,499 votes. However on March 23 the Election Court ruled that 5 protest votes cast in favor of Pinder should be counted, pushing Pinder's total to 1,504 votes, making him the winner of the seat.

Bethel was blasted in the justices' ruling, where it was said that he failed to protect the integrity of the Elizabeth register.

And as the PLP MP's legal team prepares to collect on Election Court costs, an FNM MP's legal counsel was still awaiting payment of his hefty bill up to a few weeks ago.

The Guardian understands that Fred Smith, who represented Marco City MP Zhivargo Laing in his successful challenge against former MP Pleasant Bridgewater, had still not received payment on his $1 million bill.


June 23, 2010

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Government urged to tread carefully on bail change

Govt urged to tread carefully on bail change
By Candia Dames ~ Guardian News Editor ~ candia@nasguard.com:



In crafting its amendment to the Bail Act the government must be careful that it does not legislate anything that would violate the constitutional rights of any citizens, according to prominent attorney Damian Gomez.

Another noted attorney, Wayne Munroe, said in an interview with The Nassau Guardian yesterday that any law that is found to be unconstitutional would have no impact.

"The Supreme Court will strike down any law that would violate somebody's constitutional right," Munroe said.

Gomez and Munroe, who spoke to The Guardian separately, were reacting to the government's declaration in the Speech from the Throne that it will bring an amendment to Parliament which would further restrict the right to bail for persons charged with serious crimes, and to limit the circumstances under which bail may be granted.

Munroe noted that currently bail is granted in three instances: When a suspect has been on remand for an unreasonable period of time; when a judge determines the evidence against that suspect is not strong and when a determination is made that prison conditions are such that a medical condition might result in a person's death in prison.

Under the Bahamian constitution, if any person is charged with a criminal offense, unless the charge is withdrawn, the case shall be afforded a fair hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial court established by law.

Gomez believes that it is often the fault of the Office of the Attorney General that many cases are delayed.

"The real question is why is it taking us so long to provide the attorney general's office with the resources to ensure that it carries out its lawful mandate," he said. "If it isn't a question of resources, what is happening in that office that causes delays which inflict incarceration of persons who have in fact not been convicted? We are hopeful that the government in its efforts to curtail the conditions under which bail is granted does not impede on the constitutional rights of accused persons and does not ignore the responsibility of the government to ensure our attorney general's office [has the necessary resources] and is efficient in the delivery of the services the public expects it to deliver.

"Until we resolve those problems associated with efficiency and with levels of resources we are going to be confronted with situations in which the public becomes alarmed, anxious and fearful that the law is not in fact being carried out and that persons are able to commit crimes and to do so with impunity. We are hopeful that the resources will be provided to the attorney general's office and I will be surprised if any legislative measure can be used as a substitute for the resources for that department. Until that department is properly resourced we will have the specter of long delays which result in bail being granted."

Gomez added, "We can only at this stage reiterate the warning that we are a constitutional democracy and the provisions of Article 20 of the constitution apply to criminal proceedings and civil proceedings, and the rights of accused persons are constitutionally protected rights."

Meanwhile, Munroe questioned whether the government's motives are pure as it regards its plan to introduce an amendment to the Bail Act.

"I think it's done for a cheap political gain and if that's how they tend to deal with the liberty of the subject then it's for the subject to determine whether that's reasonable," he said.

The government noted in the Speech from the Throne that a number of people who commit crimes do so while on bail pending trial for other offenses.


April 16 2010

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Sidney Stubbs, Holy Cross Member of Parliament Has Four Days To Resolve Bankruptcy Matter

Friday is a holiday, leaving Sidney Stubbs just four working days to settle his bankruptcy matter

Stubbs Has Five Days To Resolve Bankruptcy Matter

 

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

March 21, 2005

 

 

Holy Cross Member of Parliament Sidney Stubbs has reportedly started paying costs associated with his defeat in the Court of Appeal against his bankruptcy order issued by Supreme Court Justice Jeanne Thompson last year.

Mr. Stubbs is approaching the first anniversary since he was declared a bankrupt.  Meanwhile it will be one year since he took up his seat in the House of Assembly.

Wayne Munroe, who represents Mr. Stubbs’s former creditor, Gina Gonzalez, has confirmed that his team will be seeking payment from Mr. Stubbs as a result of the case arising out of the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, the Holy Cross Member of Parliament also faces an end to the deadline of March 25 granted to him after the House of Assembly approved a resolution for him to appeal the bankruptcy matter.

Mr. Munroe said on Sunday that he was not aware whether a court date had been set for the matter to return to court.

Back in January, Chief Justice Sir Burton Hall determined that under the Bankruptcy Act, Mr. Stubbs first had to settle debts with existing creditors before the order can be annulled, and that a settlement of debt with the creditor who brought the original action was not enough for an annulment.

Mr. Stubbs has argued that he has paid his debt to Ms. Gonzalez, which ought to have been enough to clear him.

If the matter is not settled before this Friday, the government would have to make a determination as to whether it would bring another resolution seeking more time for the Holy Cross MP.

It is something government officials have been trying to avoid, given the controversy the first resolution caused in the House of Assembly in September.

While some of Mr. Stubbs’s parliamentary colleagues appear confident that he would soon be able to put the matter behind him, they had been hoping that it would have been settled before the end of the six-month extension.

But that is appearing more unlikely as Friday is a holiday, leaving Mr. Stubbs just four working days to bring the matter to a close.

Government Leader in the House of Assembly Vincent Peet told The Bahama Journal last week that officials remained hopeful that there would be no need for another resolution, and indicated that that decision could not be made as long as there was still time remaining on the extension.

Some observers have pointed out that the resolution past last year is in fact ineffective given that Mr. Stubbs is not presently engaged in the process of pursuing an appeal.

A source close to Mr. Stubbs’s case claimed that ever since leaving court in January, he has been working hard to address the matter of outstanding creditors and attempting to pay off his debts.

Sidney Stubbs can Only Hold On to His Holy Cross seat in the House of Assembly as long as He has An Appeal outstanding in His Bankruptcy Matter

Chief Justice Sir Burton Hall indicated that if there is an appeal before the Privy Council, Mr. Sidney Stubbs needs to pursue that before he can ask the Supreme Court to annul the bankruptcy order issued against him in March

Stubbs Appeal In Doubt

 

 

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

29th November 2004

 

 

Nearly one week after Chief Justice Sir Burton Hall adjourned the Sidney Stubbs bankruptcy matter, officials of the Progressive Liberal Party say they have still not been able to confirm whether the Holy Cross Member of Parliament has an appeal before the Privy Council.

His attorneys could not say last Tuesday whether there was in fact an appeal and have not yet given an indication that there is one.

While the legal team filed a notice to appeal to the Privy Council in September, it still remains unclear whether it moved ahead with that intent.

A PLP official told the Bahama Journal that the uncertainty surrounding the alleged appeal is creating frustrations for the party, which is seeking to speed up the legal matter.

When he adjourned the case last week, Sir Burton indicated that if there is an appeal before the Privy Council, Mr. Stubbs needs to pursue that before he can ask the Supreme Court to annul the bankruptcy order issued against him in March.

When asked on Sunday whether he has an appeal before the Privy Council, Mr. Stubbs told the Bahama Journal that he does not speak to the press and any statement in this regard would have to come from his attorneys.

Up to last week, attorney Wayne Munroe, who represents Mr. Stubbs’s former creditor, said he had received no notice from the MP’s counsel that an appeal was indeed active.

The hierarchy of the PLP is reportedly concerned that the matter may be dragging on too long and was considering whether to indicate to Mr. Stubbs formally that the party needed to start preparing for the eventuality of a bye-election.

Mr. Stubbs can only hold on to his seat in the House of Assembly as long as he has an appeal outstanding in his bankruptcy matter.

It could be why he and his legal team are for now keeping quiet on whether they actually have an appeal active.

In September, the House of Assembly approved a resolution granting him an additional six months to pursue an appeal.

Last Tuesday, Sir Burton made it clear to the court that there was no appeal presently before him as it relates to Mr. Stubbs’s bankruptcy matter.

The Free National Movement has insisted that the Holy Cross-seat became vacant the moment Supreme Court Justice Jeannie Thompson declared the MP bankrupt in March.

When contacted on Sunday, the FNM’s candidate for Holy Cross Carl Bethel told the Bahama Journal that he wanted to steer clear of making too many public comments at this time on the matter which is still before the courts.

But he reiterated the position of his party as it relates to the latest debacle involving Mr. Stubbs.

“The government really has to decide whether they are going to honour and uphold the constitution or whether they’re going to play politics with it,” said Mr. Bethel, who is also the party’s chairman.

“They know that Sidney Stubbs has no appeal to the Privy Council.  His seat is vacant under the constitution and it is really an abuse of the constitution…the fact of the matter is if there is an appeal, the other side ought to have received concrete evidence of such a thing.”

Sidney Stubbs, Embattled Holy Cross MP - Bankruptcy Trial Adjourned

Sidney Stubbs was forced to go back to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal rejected his appeal in July on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to hear his bankruptcy appeal

PLP Member of Parliament - Sidney Stubbs’ Bankruptcy Matter Adjourned Again

 

 

By Candia Dames

Nassau, The Bahamas

September 22, 2004

 

 

  

Supreme Court Judge Jeannie Thompson on Wednesday adjourned the Sidney Stubbs bankruptcy matter to November 9, after the Holy Cross MP’s attorneys indicated that they had aborted the line of argument originally planned.

The amendment to their summons resulted in the judge putting off the matter once again.

Mr. Stubbs was forced to go back to the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal rejected his appeal in July on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal.

Attorney Wayne Munroe, who represents Mr. Stubbs’ creditor, Gina Gonzalez, explained that the matter of whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the case still has to be clarified.

Members of Mr. Stubbs’ legal team had originally given notice that they intended to argue for the reversal of the bankruptcy order under Section 18 of the Bankruptcy Act, which outlines the circumstances under which a reversal of a bankruptcy order may be made.

But on Tuesday, they changed the summons, giving notice that they intend to argue that the court has an inherent jurisdiction to hear the case.  They plan to assert essentially that there is no Act or rule under which this jurisdiction is specified.

As mentioned, because of the change, the parties have been given more time to prepare their arguments.

Mr. Stubbs has actually hired new attorneys, led by Thomas Evans.  The MP still has as part of his legal team - his parliamentary colleague, attorney Keod Smith, but Charles Mackay is no longer representing him.

Mr. Munroe had indicated during a recent appearance before Justice Thompson that an issue had arisen over whether Mr. Smith, who is also the MP for Mount Moriah, is in contempt of court for comments he made to the press in relation to this matter.

But that issue reportedly did not come up when the parties met in chambers Wednesday.

After coming out of the court, Mr. Smith told reporters, “The issue of jurisdiction will be discussed.  It will be argued before the judge on the 9^th and at that point, the judge will determine whether in fact she has jurisdiction to hear an application from Mr. Stubbs who was adjudicated a bankrupt.”

Mr. Stubbs’ attorneys assert that he can under law bring the case back to court.  But Mr. Munroe argues that only the Registrar of the Supreme Court, who has been appointed trustee in bankruptcy, can move the court to reverse the decision against Mr. Stubbs.

As already reported by the Journal, Mr. Stubbs’ legal woes began on November 28, 1996 when a Supreme Court action was filed requiring him to pay a $55,000 debt with interest to Ms. Gonzalez.

As Mr. Stubbs was preparing to head back to court, notice was being given in the House of Assembly Wednesday that the government intends to bring a resolution seeking to extend the time for him to clear up the bankruptcy matter.

But FNM officials have indicated that they would stage a demonstration in front of the House of Assembly against such a plan.

They pointed out that the Constitution only provides an extension if an MP has avenues for an appeal.  They claim Mr. Stubbs has none.

One PLP official told the Bahama Journal that Mr. Stubbs also plans to appeal before the Privy Council if he is unsuccessful in local courts.

At stake is his seat in the House of Assembly.  He has been absent from the House for the past six months, after Justice Thompson declared him a bankrupt on March 30.

Another six-month extension from the House of Assembly, as is being pushed by the government, could mean his seat on the backbench could be vacant for up to a year.