At one point late in the cross-examination, Williams went on a new path. Since Burgess maintained that she paid Minister Castro for visa recommendations, Williams insinuated repeatedly that by coming out like this, and admitting to giving a Minister money for signatures, she was opening herself up to prosecution.
Rodwell Williams, Attorney for Edmond Castro
Rodwell Williams
“I don’t think that it is conceivable to any reasonable person that Ms. Burgess would wish to maintain that she could get away with saying “I bribe the Minister but only the Minister is guilty of bribery. I don’t have anything to do with it because the Minister told me to give him the money.” No reasonable person would let that fly. That won’t fly with any reasonable person in my view, even though there are unreasonable persons, but I think that really destroyed her own credibility because she refused to concede…she was only prepared to accept that she was morally wrong, but she is more than morally wrong if what she said is true, but she is refusing to accept that.”
Reporter
“Sir but that was that the entire thrust of your cross-examination?”
Rodwell Williams
“Well I won’t go through the entire cross-examination. It was too long. But the thrust of the examination is that she was simply lying about what she alleged, and I think her failure to come forthright in relation to bribery being a one-way street…and that won’t fly with anybody and that’s one of the major ointment in terms of her testimony.”
Reporter
“Sir but that point then would mean that you accept that Minister Castro did accept the bribe…”
Rodwell Williams
“No I am not accepting anything. I am saying to you that her credibility is impugned by the fact that she had the gall to say to a reasonable person or this Court that bribery is a one way-street. There’s the briber and the bribee, the giver and the taker, and they are both liable and exposed to prosecution.”
Anthony Sylvetre
Anthony Sylvestre, Attorney for Alvarene Burgess
“Honestly I think that was a low on the part of the counsel for Mr. Castro to ask such a question. How can he seek to suggest that only Ms. Burgess ought to be prosecuted? Certainly this would have been a matter that involves the Hon. Edmond Castro, so if there is any question or issue of prosecution then he obviously would be involved with respect to any such discussion. But I did notice that the members of the DPP’s Office were inside the Courtroom so we don’t know what may happen.”
Legal submissions are due on the twenty-sixth of June and oral closing statements will be on the third of July.
View the full article