The Marlon Samuels Judgement

Read it here:

http://caribbeancricket.com/news/2008/05/16/2729


I fully concur with Justice Bishop's opinion. I will single out the following paragraphs:

"My colleagues would appear to have disregarded the point, though they acknowledge that MARLON SAMUELS’ situation described a special case, but they relegated its merit to the belated stage of mitigation of sentence, rather than elevate it to the status of an impeccable factor that tested the alleged verity of the Board’s charge. An attempt by the Board to propose that the hotel bill, paid for by MR. KOCHHAR has not yet been repaid by Samuels and therefore discredits his plea of innocence, is an example of venturing into the extraneous, since one or more of several events could have contributed to SAMUELS’ failure to repay the money in reasonable time.

On the question of sentence, I had regard to the majority decision [3:1] and proposed that our tribunal should, in the strongest possible terms, frown on the concept of MANDATORY SENTENCING, in this special case of MARLON SAMUELS, where the allegation suggested a FIRST OFFENCE by a person who has many MERIT MARKS to his credit, but is established to be wanting in capacity to commit the act alleged against him. The fact of a money payment was not enough to establish the Board’s case. More relevant evidence was required but nothing more was presented."

I can see nothing in this report to warrant a 2 year ban. Based on the flimsy evidence, most of us, including many who sit in judgment, would be behind bars. I am not surprised with the majority decision led by Justice Saunders. I expect nothing better from him. I am surprised that Riche was part of that majority. And I applaud the position of Justice Bishop.

http://www.amsaadigital.com