Philipsburg:--- The Common Court of Appeals will pronounce its verdict on the summons that was issued to the main murder suspect that confessed to killing American citizens Micheal and Thelma King on February 20th, 2013. Michael and Thelma King were murdered in their Cupe Coy condominium on September 19th, 2012. The main suspect Meyshane Kemar Johnson will remain in custody until the verdict is rendered.
Attorney at Law Brenda Brooks appealed the ruling of the judge of the Court of First Instance who ruled that the summons that was issued three days before the suspect was due to appear in court was null void but in her ruling the judge stated that Meyshane Kemar Johnson will remain in pretrial detention, while Attorney at Law Brenda Brooks feels that her client should be released from pre-trial detention. At the appeal hearing on Wednesday, Attorney General of St. Maarten Taco Stein told the panel consisting of three judges that the only reason Brooks appealed the verdict was to stall the criminal proceedings. Stein said that the prosecution had three weeks in which they could repair the damage they caused to the case but because Brooks appealed the case that hindered the proceedings. Stein explained that the lower court already ruled that the summons was null and void.
The President of the Appeals Court asked the suspect Meyshane Kemar Johnson on more than one occasion why he appealed the decision rendered by the lower court because it was in his favor. Johnson at some point could not answer the questions posed to him but finally he told the judge that he felt that his rights as a suspect were violated by the Prosecution.
In making her case to the Appeals Court, Attorney at Law Brenda Brooks told the court that while the Court of First Instance ruled that the summons was null and void, the judge did not release her client. Brooks cited at least four cases, three of which were tried in Curacao and one in the Netherlands where the judges in those cases clearly ruled that the summons were declared inadmissible. Brooks in her plea to the Court asked the judges what is different on St. Maarten in this case. The Netherlands and Curacao deemed these acts inadmissible why is it different here when the laws are the same. "What is happening here is the Prosecution made errors upon errors and they want to keep my client throughout the process for the First Instance and when the case reaches you in the Appeals Court you will have to rule that mistakes were made and the summons are inadmissible."
Brooks also asked the court to forget about the seriousness of the case because if it was that serious the Prosecutor's Office would have followed proper procedures to ensure that justice is served. Brooks asked the court to look at the procedures that were used in the case compared to what is stated in case laws. The cases Brooks quoted were also serious cases and the judges in Curacao and the Netherlands applied the law. She told the court that "murder is murder", it does not matter if it involves one or two people and what must be applied is the law and not emotions.
Brooks told the Appeal Courts that the judge in the Court of First Instance gave the prosecution an opportunity to repair the damage they caused in the first place but instead of fixing the problem the Prosecutor's Office created more problems. Brooks showed the court the two other summons that were issued to her client. The President of the Appeals Court told Brooks that those summons were not up for discussion but Brooks maintained that she had to bring in the other summons that were given to her client to show the court exactly why she chose to appeal the decision rendered on the first summons. At the hearing on Wednesday was the Head of the Detective Department Denise Jacob, and several other high ranking officers. Among the people in the packed court tribune were several friends of the victims Micheal and Thelma King all of whom were wearing photo tags and buttons in support of the victims whose lives were snatched away from them.
Dutch Prosecutor Disturbed Hearing in Open Session --- Opened War Against SMN News Reporter.
Also in court was Dutch Prosecutor Gonda van der Wulp who attended the session as a guest but chose to sit where reporters are supposed to sit. When SMN News reporter reached the court, the seats for reporters were taken up by Gonda Van der Wulp. SMN News reporter chose to sit behind Prosecutor Van der Wulp and at times leaned forward in order to hear what was being said during the proceedings. Prosecutor Van der Wulp chose to disturb the entire proceedings when she began screaming at SMN News reporter saying that reporters are not allowed to take photographs in court. It must be noted that while SMN News reporter had her camera around her neck, the camera was off and no photographs were being taken in court. Wednesday's court session is not the first this media house has covered and it is clear that the prosecutors that are currently working on St. Maarten are on the edge because the incompetencies of the Prosecutor's Office are now being exposed.
The actions of Van der Wulp on Wednesday clearly portrayed racism and someone who has an axe to grind against a reporter who chose to expose the incompetencies of the Prosecutor's Office where she is working. Even though a police officer asked SMN News reporter to leave the court room, the question still remains why Van der Wulp a Dutch Prosecutor who is being paid by St. Maarten tax payers was allowed to stay inside the court room while she is the one who created a big scene and lied in public.