And, so that was yesterday evening in Belmopan…and then that leads back to the city last night where they were unable to get an audience in front of the Chief Magistrate, Ann Marie Smith due to the late hour.

Our news team was at the courthouse from the moment the police van arrived from Belmopan up to when it left, and then again today when they were brought back to court for arraignment and remand to the Belize Central Prison.

Daniel Ortiz has the full story starting with last night:

After racing the 5 defendants down from Belmopan to Belize City, a phalanx of police officers parked them at the footsteps of the Belize City Magistrate's Court. The door to let them out would only open if the cops were sure that they were going to be arraigned.

But, it was clearly after-hours, a hail-mary attempt with the court locked up tight for the end of the business day.

The stress and scenery of this high profile murder case must have had the cops on edge, and they displayed hostility to the press for trying to film the accused persons. They made sure to push the cameras and the media workers as far back as they could.

Officer
"Everybody please step back. Let's go, let's go, let's go; please step back."

But, the commotion was all for nothing because though the Chief Magistrate showed up after court hours, the court was clearly not equipped to operate at the whim of the prosecution, and without proper notice.

Herbert Panton - Attorney for Mr. Mason
"The chief magistrate has left, she has said she will deal with it in the morning and that's the end of the matter here as far as tonight is concerned."

Reporter
"Any reason why?"

Herbert Panton - Attorney for Mr. Mason
"It's too late the building is already locked up, I can't find the caretaker it's too late." 

The cops tried again today, bringing a second round of fevered activity to the Belize City Magistrate's Court as the press tried to capture these accused men on camera, and their families gathered to show support for them.

Though Panton tried to block the arraignment of these men for a second time, the police prosecution came prepared this time. Assistant Police Commissioner Chester Williams gave a tour de force performance which demonstrated his usefulness as a trained attorney on the police's side.

ACP Chester Williams- Represented the Prosecution
"I was contacted by the commissioner yesterday evening and was told to deal with the matter of the arraignment and concerning the fact that the defendants do have attorney in the presence of Mr. Panton and he had made certain submissions at the court in Belmopan; it is only right that we match the defence in providing and attorney as well to deal with the matter on the prosecution side. Hence the reason I was allowed to step in and represent the prosecution in the arraignment today."

"Well it has a lot to do with the inexperience of the prosecutor who appeared in Belmopan yesterday and there are certain matters that were raised by the defence that of legal implication and it was only right that we make legal submissions on those submissions that he made yesterday. Hence the reason I went and I did my legal research and came up with authority to guide the court as it relates the fact that he was saying there was not sufficient evidence when on the face of it there is sufficient circumstantial evidence to indicate that these 5 men are indeed responsible for the death of Mr. LLewellyn Lucas."

Daniel Ortiz
"Can someone take away from this that because the police were trying to react and respond to the outrage of the general public as what had happened that is why these missteps happened yesterday and now you all are here trying to fix it up?"

ACP Chester Williams- Represented the Prosecution
"I don't think or I don't want to say that there was any misstep yesterday. I guess that the police did an arraignment in Belmopan yesterday and it was done the way other arraignments have been done but because of the sensitive nature of the offence and the fact that these men have legal representation and Mr. Panton is right to make submissions on behalf of his client that's what he's paid to do. The court is also obliged to listen to his submissions and if the submissions do make sense, are of legal implication then the court must act accordingly and that's what the court did yesterday."

Daniel Ortiz
"Sir was it a situation where you were arguing for arguing sake to try to keep your clients out of jail as long as possible?"

Herbert Panton - Attorney for the Defence
"If you can find any attorney who argues for argument sake; no there were two fundamental tenants to our submissions. One is that this matter was already adjudicated on so if you bring the same facts before the court it amounts to forum shopping and basically the same facts came before the court with a little addition here and there that did not in any way change the nature of the tenuous nature of the facts. And secondly what ought to happen is that the prosecution ought to be given their 14 day to get all their facts together."

Daniel Ortiz
"The outcome that your clients are now remanded something you had been fighting against since yesterday."

Herbert Panton - Attorney for the Defence
"Well the chief magistrate has ruled so we wait for disclosure to see the evidence that the prosecution has against my client. Disclosure is set for the 7th of September so we see what happens then."

But, while that's the final outcome, Panton reminded us that police, in his opinion, have breached the rights of the accused person. He pointed to instances this weekend which appear to be deliberate attempts to frustrate the protection of those rights.

Herbert Panton - Attorney for the Defence
"It took me 9 hours before I was able to finally see those gentlemen. I was still not able to see 3 of them. I went back Sunday to San Ignacio police station to see those 2. Those 2 were in nothing more than boxers, nothing more than boxers the police still have not given them their clothes to put on since they were detained Friday night. There is one client who up to this very second I have not spoken to any at all. So the police can sit at these beautiful press conferences and speak about all the crime fighting measures that they are putting in place but if on the back end all they do is to breach the rights of the citizens; nothing that they put in place is going to work because everybody will continue to walk unless the police realise that a man must be given his full constitutional rights."

So, how did the prosecution convince the Chief Magistrate to proceed with the arraignment this time around? Well, as soon as the court was called into session, defence attorney Herbert Panton made submissions before the Chief Magistrate that she should not entertain the police. Panton told the court that once again, they had not satisfied the requirements of the new criminal procedure rules because these updated facts that were provided this time around was still not enough to substantiate the charge of murder. He added that the police should not be allowed to get away with depriving these men of their freedom on a whim, given that there is no bail for murder or kidnapping.

It was at that point that ACP Chester Williams, who's a trained attorney, made representation on behalf of the police prosecution that police have an airtight case against all 5 men, and he proceeded to lay down briefly what that case will look like in the Supreme Court. The Chief Magistrate agreed and ruled that the arraignment should move forward.

With that all 5 men were read their charges, and they were remanded to Prison. The Chief Magistrate has ordered that the prosecution must provide full disclosure by September 14. The case has also been given another adjournment of October 7 for case management, and it will get further hearings until they reach to the stage of the preliminary inquiry.