Judge slammed in money laundering mistrial

Video Content

This box contains video content. In order to view the video you require Flash Player Version 9 or above.

Download Flash Player here

A Jersey accountant jailed in 2007 for six years for money laundering has had his conviction quashed.

His defence council took his case to the Jersey Court Of Appeal but it was rejected. They then took it to the Privy Council - the highest court islanders can appeal to - where it was finally quashed.

The judge, Commissioner Sir Geoffrey Nice was branded 'sarcastic, mocking and patronising.' He interrupted Mr Michel 273 times as he was giving evidence. It's now expected to cost the Jersey tax payer millions of pounds. Mr Michel's defence lawyer says in retrospect, he should have objected more at the time.

Adam Fowler spoke to Mr Michel's defence lawyer David le Quesne.

Comment on this article

Your Name:* (Please include name of your parish)
Your Email Address:
Remember Me:
Your Comments:*
Please enter text from this image
To confirm and submit this article comment, please enter the text in the image into the text box below.

   Terms and Conditions
Currently displaying the top 9 comments View all 9 comments
[No Subject] Report Abuse
Posted By: mick st lawrence on 10-Nov-2009
typical jersey! inconsistant judgements and once again exposing jersey for what it really is A JOKE

Judge Slammed Report Abuse
Posted By: Linda St. Saviour on 10-Nov-2009
I agree AP, Phil & Dave, this situation only lends credence to Stuart Syvrets point.

Bailiff Report Abuse
Posted By: Dave, St Helier on 09-Nov-2009
This has once again exposed our Bailiff for his poor judgement in rejecting the original appeal. The Jersey media and legal profession will of course be keen to bury this point with minimal reporting or debate. After all, we cannot question our 'supreme leader'. After reading the Privy Council comments it is astonishing that Michael Birt did not reach the same conclusion.

Baffled Report Abuse
Posted By: kate St Martins on 09-Nov-2009
Why on earth did this guy's lawyer, Le Quesne not protest at the time about these interuptions. It seems to me when people appeal against things they just go around until they get the decision they want to hear.

Damning Report Abuse
Posted By: phil on 09-Nov-2009
The ruling by the Privy Council was so damning of the trial that it is totally incomprehensible why the Jersey Court of Appeal failed to spot the blatant disregard for impartiality during that trial.

[No Subject] Report Abuse
Posted By: Michael st brelade on 08-Nov-2009
Legal aid for those in difficulty is nothing short of a joke, the law favours those with money to pay large lawers fees The man in the street gets very very poor representation in Jersey if any! Jersey is 50 years behind the UK in the delivery of equal justice for all

Fair Trial Report Abuse
Posted By: AP on 08-Nov-2009
Good point Trial, indeed all judicial systems have flaws and in Jersey some of these were clearly spelled out in an independent review the “Review of Criminal Justice Policy in Jersey” 2002, which is available on the internet. . This showed that Jersey’s Justice system has numerous failings, including Jersey having one of the highest prison populations per capita in Europe, nearly twice that of Guernsey. Justice is often “rough” as Legal advice to those facing charge is usually lacking, many cases being brought and presented by unqualified volunteers otherwise known as Centeniers. There was also concern about the multiple roles carried out by the Attorney General. Of the 10 recommendations of the Review, 7 years later most have not been delivered. The Jersey Judiciary themselves having played a big part in blocking the changes.

Trial Report Abuse
Posted By: Matt on 08-Nov-2009
There are sometimes flaws in all judicial systems AP so get real.

Fair Trial Report Abuse
Posted By: AP on 07-Nov-2009
Perhaps now some of Senator Syvret's ranting detractors will understand that there are indeed serious flaws in our judicial processes that need to be addressed. How many more of these cases do we need, how much more huge sums of public money is to be wasted before the legal system is changed? And before the onslaught of comments saying he was a UK judge, the question has to be asked, who invited him? It's also pertinent to note that the first appeal was heard in Jersey and rejected by none other that the current Bailiff.

Currently displaying the top 9 comments View all 9 comments

Find more stories in:

ITV channel Television Logo  06/11/2009

more from channelonline.tv

By using this site, you agree we can set and use cookies. For more details of these cookies and how to disable them, see our cookie policy.