http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/Attorney-removed-from-judges-team-296339601.htmlAttorney removed from judge’s team’
Allegedly caught copying sensitive documents...
By by denyse renne denyse.renne@trinidadexpress.com
Story Created: Mar 14, 2015 at 9:02 PM ECT
Story Updated: Mar 14, 2015 at 9:02 PM ECT
Former judicial support officer (JSO) Dayadai Asha Harripaul has refused to comment on allegations that she was removed from the team of a sitting judge after being caught photocopying sensitive court documents without approval.
The Sunday Express approached Harripaul, now an attorney, last Wednesday at the San Fernando High Court for a response to the allegation.
Based on information received from top judicial sources and from interviews conducted, the Sunday Express asked Harripaul to confirm or deny that a request was made by a judge to have her removed from his team where she served as JSO in 2012.
Harripaul continued walking and refused to answer.
Asked about the alleged photocopying of sensitive court documents without permission and why this was done, Harripaul again refused to say anything.
The Sunday Express persisted in getting a response but Harripaul refused to say anything.
Harripaul, the Sunday Express understands, was called to the Bar last year and resigned her JSO position.
Sources say shortly after the alleged photocopying incident, the judge complained to Harripaul’s immediate supervisor and she was immediately removed from the team and placed on the team of another judge.
However, her duties were scaled down.
This incident, judicial sources say, occurred in 2012.
Prior to this incident, Harripaul had submitted a report to court officials regarding documents being taken by her and handed to attorney Gerald Ramdeen in 2010.
Efforts to contact the judge were unsuccessful, as the Sunday Express was told he was unavailable.
Sources further say investigators probing the 2010 removal of files from the Supreme Court are aware of this incident and have compiled a list of individuals to be interviewed.
Some of the individuals include former registrar of the supreme court Evelyn Ann Petersen who, the Sunday Express understands, is currently residing in Canada.
Petersen had submitted a statement to police in 2011, expressing concern over the removal of the documents from the High Court and being given to Ramdeen.
Section manager and second deputy marshal (clerk to judges) Maureen Matthews Ochoa, Sandra Mohan Pariag, the judge and former colleagues of Harripaul and the human resources manager at the time are also expected to be interviewed by police.
Senior judicial sources who are aware of the 2012 incident, have also raised concerns as to why no disciplinary action was taken by the Judiciary, since this was the second incident where Harripaul’s conduct was called into question.
On February 13, Chief Justice Ivor Archie issued a statement saying “the Judiciary is aware of comments in the media concerning the discovery in October 2010 of court documents at the offices of an attorney-at-law. The matter was referred to the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) for investigation in November 2010.
“A report from the TTPS on said investigation was submitted to the Judiciary in May 2011. The report indicated that after the interview of various individuals, no further police action in the matter was found to be warranted.
“No disciplinary action was taken by the Judiciary against the officer involved in the incident and she has since left the organisation.”
Archie’s statement came following comments from the police that the 2010 incident was investigated and no wrongdoing was found.
The police, in their report, had also indicated that attorney Mark Seepersad, who brought the discovery of the confidential court documents to the attention of Petersen, was interviewed. It is a claim which Seepersad has denied.
Apart from this, senior police officers are also questioning the reason(s) behind the move to have Special Branch detective Sgt Allister Guevarro conduct a criminal investigation into the 2010 incident.
Guevarro was appointed by his seniors to investigate the circumstances surrounding the confidential files being found on the premises of the Stone Street law chambers which was once shared by Ramdeen and Seepersad.
Sources say it is not the norm to have Special Branch officers conduct criminal probes, since such officers are used for bodyguard services and intelligence gathering.
“That investigation, ought to have been conducted by either the Fraud Squad or Anti-Corruption Bureau,” the source said.
Two weeks ago following a Sunday Express expose which questioned the handling of the 2010 investigation, acting Commissioner of Police Stephen Williams mandated Assistant Commissioner of Police Simon Lendor to re-open the case.
In 2010, Seepersad reported to Petersen that he and Ramdeen shared law chambers at Unit 1, 27 Stone Street, Port of Spain, when he decided to dissolve the partnership.
Seepersad, in his report to Petersen, said on November 1, 2010, while packing the remaining documents left behind by Ramdeen, he found a box which contained a number of documents and personal effects belonging to the court.
“On inspection, I found a number of documents which, to my mind, appeared to be documents of the High Court and, in particular, the registrar’s chambers,” he wrote.
Seepersad said he also found “a hard-covered notebook which was labelled ‘File Movement Book’, belonging to Justice Lennox Deyalsingh (now retired), and “I formed the view that these documents were the property of the High Court and as such should be in the custody of the registrar of the Supreme Court.”
In his statement to Petersen, Seepersad named Harripaul as being a frequent visitor to the chambers he once shared with Ramdeen.
Harripaul and Ramdeen were interviewed by police.
Ramdeen in an interview with the Sunday Express said though he went to the interview voluntarily, he was never questioned about the court documents.
Harripaul in her interview with the police, admitted to taking the documents and giving them to Ramdeen for safe keeping, since she was not allocated a personal desk at the High Court to store her belongings.