| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26th
January 2010
COURT NEWS
By Samantha
Alexander
An
incident that occurred between Kurt Ghirad and
Orlando Summerson on Saturday 18th October 2008
at 3:45pm San Souci,Castries was heard in the
high court this week.
The two appeared in high court on Wednesday
January 2010 since Mr Ghirard was charged and
arrested with the offence of burglary, which
occurred on 20th November 2008.
According to Ghirad’s lawyer, he gave
Summerson to reupholster his car seats in August
2008, since he operated an automotive and home
upholstery shop. He also gave him a deposit
of EC$900 in relation to the job since Summerson
said it would take him five to seven days to
complete it.
Summerson completed the job two months later
because of a delay in a shipment of materials.
When it arrived he had to reorder because of
the wrong colour. Summerson left to deliver
the seats to Ghirad on Saturday 18th October
2008.
Since there was no one there, he said, he left
the seats next to Ghirad’s car and left
to find someone to install them. Afterwards,
he headed to his business place when he observed
his back door open. Upon entering inside he
saw two men, one of whom he realized was Ghirad
and the other a stranger.
Ghirad holding a televison set in his hand told
Summerson he came to collect his seats and the
other gentleman had two television sets as well.
He told them to leave or he would call the police
but his cellphone was knocked out of his hand
by Ghirad who was standing next to him.
He pushed Ghirad who fell down and the second
man who was there swung his foot to kick Summerson
when he attempted to reach for the cellphone
on the floor. The two had a physical altercation
whilst Ghirad, who appeared drunk to Summerson,
was still on the floor.
After the altercation, Summerson went into his
shop to locate Mr Ghirad and said to him he
should call his father because the seats were
being installed in his car as they spoke. Ghirad
said he just wanted his seats or he would leave
with the 27” Gold Star television. Ghirad
told the two men to leave his shop and he contacted
the police.
|
|
|
|
|
The two men
left the place; almost an hour later when
the police, corporal Moses Ferguson, arrived,
Summerson gave his statement as to what transpired
between himself and the two gentlemen.
Officer Ferguson was called up to give his
statement. He began by saying he was on duty
at about 12:30pm when he received a report
by telephone. On arrival, he met with the
virtual complainant who made his report .He
entered the place when he noticed several
items were scattered on the floor. Upon further
investigation, Ghirad was arrested and charged
with the offence of burglary.
He recorded it on the statement for arresting
persons, handed it over to Ghirad who agreed,
and placed his signature. No threats or accusations
were made by corporal Fergusson or any other
persons. Present was Mrs Theresa Philip (J.P.)
Kurt Ghirad was represented by lawyer Lorne
Theophilus. He said “ The prosecution
wants you to believe that Kurt Ghirad entered
as a trespasser, when he has a right to check
on his goods since 2 months passed and he
did not get it. There is no evidence, witnesses
or finger print to substantiate that Mr Ghirad
opened the place, so you cannot conclude he
did so. Mr Summerson indicated that generally
there was no specific date for the job to
be completed.
Summerson stated that it would have taken
5 to 7 days. Having been given a time frame,
after it elapsed, Ghirad contacted Summerson
on several occations. He also said that because
he referred to Mr Ghirad as a customer and
all customers can come to the premises to
check on their items, Ghirad has a right to
be on the premises. “So Kurt Ghirad
is not guilty.”
Giovanni James who represented Orlando Summerson
stated that since Kurt Ghirad entered Mr Summerson’s
place without permission, it was a trespass.
“It is not about Mr Ghirad breaking
the door, it is about his trespassing on the
premises, entering the shop with the television
in his hand and an intention not to return
it. Focus on the evidence presented, the defendant
Kurt Ghirad is guilty because his intention
was to permanently deprive Orlando Summerson
of his possession.” James said
On Thursday 22nd 2010, the jury came with
their final decision and Kurt Ghirad was found
not guilty.
Discuss
Story
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
