High Court Judge Richard Floyd has upheld a decision by Magistrate Michael Laudat to deny bail to murder accused Desmond Rocque of Grand Bay.
The applicant was born in the Commonwealth of Dominica on 31st December 1990. He is 32 years of age. He is charged with possession of a prohibited weapon, possession of ammunition, and converting (modifying) a prohibited weapon.
After being arrested for those offenses, he was charged with assaulting police, threats, and wounding. The applicant is also charged with two separate murders, for which he was on bail. The applicant made a bail application in Magistrates’ Court. The learned Magistrate Laudat declined to grant bail, and the applicant renewed his application in this court.
The applicant was granted bail by the learned Justice Stephenson on 12th July 2018 for murder. A bond in the amount of $100,000.00 with two sureties was ordered. Condition 2 (d) requires the applicant to “lead an honest and industrious life and be of good behavior”
The applicant was charged with a second murder and was again granted bail, this time by the learned Justice Roberts, on 10th July 2020. A bond in the amount of $300,000.00 with two sureties was ordered. Condition 8 requires the applicant to “lead an honest and industrious life and be of good behavior.”
Condition 9 indicates that “bail will be revoked upon breach of any of the above conditions.” On 27th June 2022, officers of the Commonwealth of Dominica Police Force received information that caused them to establish a presence on the roadway in Layou. At approximately 3:30 pm, a vehicle was seen approaching their position. The vehicle was directed to stop but failed to do so. Instead, it increased speed, mounted the sidewalk, and collided with a bridge. The driver, later identified as the applicant, exited the vehicle and fled. He was observed to take an object from under his shirt and throw it to the ground. He was apprehended, and the object was recovered. It was a loaded Glock pistol, with a magazine containing thirteen rounds of ammunition.
The pistol had been modified, converting it into a prohibited weapon. The serial number on the firearm had been obliterated. The applicant was not licensed to possess firearms. He was arrested and charged accordingly [6]On 29th June 2022, while in police custody, the applicant was uncooperative with police during a search of his person. He fought with two officers, injuring one and threatening to kill another. He was again arrested and further charged accordingly. On 22nd February 2023, learned counsel for the applicant, Zena Moore-Dyer advised the court that, although she had filed the original application and supporting material, she would be withdrawing from the case, and passing it over to new counsel for the applicant, Wayne Norde. The hearing was adjourned to 24th March 2023. No formal application to be removed from the record was filed by Zena Moore-Dyer.
https://www.eccourts.org/desmond-rocque-v-the-chief-of-police/
Decision
A judicial interim release application requires the court to be confident that, amongst other things, the applicant will not flee the jurisdiction and fail to attend court. He will surrender himself into custody when required. After reviewing all the material filed, and upon hearing the submissions of counsel, the court has no such concerns. However, that is not the end of it. The court must also be satisfied that the remaining considerations found in s. 7 (2), will be complied with.
Turning to the other enumerated grounds, the court must be satisfied that the applicant will not commit any offense while on bail. The firearm offenses and the allegations of violence toward police officers demonstrate a propensity to commit offenses while on bail.
Given the very serious nature of these charges, the court has grave concerns for the protection and safety of the community, should the applicant be again released on bail. In totality, the court is satisfied that it is not in the public interest to grant bail to the applicant. There are no conditions that could be crafted to satisfy those concerns. Further, to release this applicant on bail, in the face of this behavior, and on these facts, would lead to a serious erosion in public confidence in the administration of justice.
For all of these reasons, and pursuant to s. 4 (3), and s. 7, of the Bail Act, the applicant has failed to show cause why he should be released. This application for judicial interim release is therefore dismissed, and the applicant is remanded into custody.
10[36]For all of these reasons, and pursuant to s. 4 (3), and s. 7, of the Bail Act, the applicant has failed to show cause why he should be released. This application for judicial interim release is therefore dismissed, and the applicant is remanded into custody.