A High Court judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by WPC Nicole Clement complaining about the Director of Public Prosecutions' failure to continue plea discussions, make a further plea agreement with her for financial support after the trial and for her family to migrate.
In a ruling on July 30, Justice Margaret Mohammed said Clement’s lawsuit was academic.
Clement was the State’s main witness in the murder trial against six police officers charged with the 2011 murder of three Moruga friends.
She was originally also charged with the murders of Abigail Johnson, 23, Alana Duncan, 28, and Kerron “Fingers” Eccles. The three murder charges against her were discontinued in 2012 after the DPP gave her immunity to turn state witness and testify against the six.
However, during the trial at the Hall of Justice in Port of Spain, Clement refused to testify, and was deemed a “hostile witness.”
The six officers were acquitted on November 24, 2023.
Clement had filed two separate lawsuits relating to the plea deal and her security detail at a safe house in 2022.
Justice Frank Seepersad threw out the lawsuit on the alleged removal of her security detail on November 29, 2023.
Clement is expected to reappear in the new law term before Justice Mauriceia Joseph in the San Fernando High Court on the single count of conspiracy to pervert the course of public justice. A status hearing was held on July 26.
In her lawsuit, Clement alleged there were outstanding issues with her plea agreement with the Director of Public Prosecutions. She said it made no provision for her family to join the justice protection programme (JPP) or emigrate when the matter was done, and there was no provision for a recommendation for a non-custodial sentence for her.
Clement claimed her attorney at the time assured her the outstanding issues had been raised with DPP Roger Gaspard and discussions would continue after the plea agreement was made.
She said she was prepared to plead guilty, but there were issues with the plea deal to be resolved.
In reply, the DPP argued that Clement’s claim was completely academic. He also argued Clement could not expect any concession, since she breached the agreement by not giving evidence against her former colleagues.
Gaspard also said the issues Clement raised fell outside his remit.
In explaining why she found Clement’s lawsuit academic, Mohammed said she had breached the terms of the agreement, so it would not be in the interest of justice to grant the orders she sought. Although she said there was a delay by the DPP in stating his position on Clement’s requests – they were made in 2019, but the DPP only made his position known in 2022 – it was not unreasonable, since it took the witness seven years to write to him asking for further discussions.
Gaspard also contended he could not and did not agree with any proposal that fell outside the Plea Agreement Act. He also explained that the Justice Protection Act established an entire programme to protect certain witnesses and others, and he did not
