There is much talk that additional evidence, in addition to the indictment and the special agent's affidavit, should be adduced before accused, Christopher 'Dudus' Coke, be made to answer charges in the United States.

Federal prosecutions are uniformly governed by the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Southern District of New York adheres to these rules, in addition to their local rules.

The indictment of an individual is a result of evidence presented to a grand jury, solely by the prosecuting authorities. An indictment signed by the grand jury foreperson signifies that there is probable cause to believe that the individual has committed a crime, and gives the government the authority to arrest that individual.

Preponderance of evidence

The standard for obtaining an indictment is equivalent to a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence in a civil case and is much less than a showing of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as is required for a conviction in a criminal case.

Because grand jury proceedings are held in secret, and not subject to cross-examination, Coke's attorneys are correct in challenging the indictment as "mere allegations". This assertion is buttressed by the fact that individuals giving evidence to a grand jury in conspiracy cases are normally under indictment themselves, or have been sentenced to prison terms. It is no secret that to induce testimony before a grand jury there is a quid pro quo.

With respect to the timing of the presentation of evidence to the defendant, the government is under no obligation to do so until 14 days after the defendant has plead not guilty to the charges.

In this case, we can expect thousands of printed pages to be presented by the government. More important, within 14 days of jury selection the government must provide information on government witnesses who have been induced to testify, and must also provide a written copy of those individuals' previous testimony.

Particulars necessary

Additionally, the government must provide the defence with the particulars of those testifying on the behalf of the government, including their criminal history. Historically, individuals who will receive a benefit from the government deny this in court, and proffer religion as the reason why they have chosen to testify against the accused. This adds to the suspicion of the testimony by these government witnesses.

Thus, there will be no further evidence forwarded to Coke's defence team from the prosecuting authorities to support Coke's indictment. Coke's constitution rights are not judicially recognised as being infringed, if the US government decides to proceed with the extradition process without further evidence. The Government of Jamaica, through its diplomatic channels, may, however, demand additional particulars.

In the event Coke is brought before the court in New York, his full constitutions rights will attach, including a bond hearing, and a request for a bill of particulars to flesh out the allegations against him.

I am, etc.,

KIRK BARROW

kabarrow@hotmail.com

Florida