Lafiamo Charles Connor v Comissioner of Police, Marvin Holas and Attorney General

• Jurisdiction: Anguilla
• Judge: Moise, J.
• Judgment Date: 04 April 2025
• Neutral Citation: AI 2025 HC 2
• Court: High Court (Saint Christopher, Nevis And Anguilla)
• Year: 2025
• Docket Number: AXAHCV2021/0025

Lafiamo Charles Connor

and

Comissioner of Police, Marvin Holas and Attorney General

Moise, J.

AXAHCV2021/0025

High Court

Appearances:

Mr. Darshan Ramdhani KC with Mr. Devin Hodge of counsel for the Claimant.

Dr. Francis Alexis KC with Mr. Theon Tross of counsel for the Defendants.

Moise, J.

1 This is a claim for wrongful arrest and detention, malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. Taj Connor (Mr. Connor) challenges his arrest on 16th February 2020 and his detention in police custody until 19th February 2020. He was formally charged on 18th February 2020 for the murder of Conrad Gumbs. Mr. Connor claims that this decision to charge him was malicious, done in bad faith and without reasonable cause. As a result of this prosecution, Mr. Connor was remanded in custody for a further period of 28 days commencing 19th February 2020. He was eventually granted bail by a judge of the High Court. Mr. Connor also challenges this subsequent period of detention. He also asserts, in his claim, that the actions of Police Sergeant Marvin Holas (Sgt. Holas), acting on the instructions of the then Commissioner of Police, amount to misfeasance in public office. As a result of this Mr. Connor claims damages, interest and costs.

2 I have determined that Mr. Connor has made out his case for malicious prosecution and is entitled to damages. I have, however, dismissed the claims of wrongful arrest and detention and misfeasance in public office. These are the reasons for my decision.

THE FACTS

3 On 16th February 2020, Mr. Connor was 32 years old. He had then, and continues to have, no criminal record. He had no run-ins with the law before and had never been arrested. He states, in his witness statement, that he has been a practising Christian for most of his adult life. In the documents disclosed by the defendants, the court notes that during the course of the police investigation into the murder of Condrad Gumbs, the police were in receipt of a number of character references in relation to Mr. Connor. Whilst I agree that a character reference from close relatives may be viewed as self—serving, it appears that in general the police were in receipt of credible information regarding Mr. Connor's previous good character and his unstained reputation. These statements were given to the police on 19th February 2020. That was one day after charges were laid against him. During the course of the trial, witnesses also appeared before me to attest to Mr. Connor's personality and character. I have accepted these as being an accurate reflection of Mr. Connor's personal history and his right to be viewed as an upstanding citizen with an unblemished record.

4 Mr. Connor describes 16th February 2020 as the day his life changed forever. Not only did he narrowly escape with his life, being in the vicinity when Mr. Gumbs was murdered on 12th February 2020, but he was subsequently arrested and charged with this murder. Having observed Mr. Connor's demeanour in the witness box, it appeared clear to me that he was deeply hurt and offended by this experience. There was also no evidence presented to me of any motive on Mr. Connor's part to commit murder. There was no evidence of his involvement in crimes of violence in any way and no past history of animosity between him and Mr. Gumbs.

5 Mr. Connor states that on 12th February 2020, he was on a blue bench at the Spanish bar in Blowing Point. He was playing a game on his phone and saw Mr. Gumbs' arrival at the bar. They exchanged pleasantries and Mr. Gumbs remained standing near Mr. Connor. Mr. Connor states that he was not really paying attention to what was happening around him but then felt his jacket being suddenly grabbed by Mr. Gumbs. He heard Mr. Gumbs shout out and then saw someone approaching from another direction with an object in hand. Mr. Connor's evidence was that the object looked like a gun. He then pulled away from Mr. Gumbs and jumped out of the way onto the ground.

6 Mr. Connor was of the view that Mr. Gumbs was trying to shield himself by grabbing him. He states that, after jumping to the ground, he then heard shots firing. He scrambled to his feet with fright and ran up the road to his home, which is near to the bar. Mr. Connor said that when he was a safe distance away from the scene, on the main road, he looked back and saw Mr. Gumbs outstretched on the road. That was the full extent of his involvement in the incident as he had recounted in his witness statement.

7 Mr. Connor went on to state that at 4:00am on 16th February 2020 police officers came to his home. He was asleep and then awoken by the sound of knocking on the front door of the apartment. He heard voices of people on the inside of the apartment, followed by knocking on his bedroom door. He opened the door and saw several police officers including Sgt. Holas. They immediately entered his bedroom and began searching through his belongings. They searched under the bed, on the nightstands, in the closet, in a safe and in a hamper. Mr. Connor observed the officers taking up his three mobile phones and Sgt. Holas asked him for his passport, to which he obliged. The officers also took up a pair of short jeans pants from the clothes hamper and left the bedroom with these items.

8 Mr. Connor stated that he was then informed by Sgt. Holas that, as a result of certain information received, he would be arrested and questioned at the Police Station. Mr. Connor was told to get dressed. He obliged and proceeded to The Valley Police Station along with the police officers. Whilst leaving the house, however, Mr. Connor states that he observed more police officers searching the back porch. He observed an officer take up a slipper which was found during that search.

9 At the police station, Mr. Connor was met by Police Officers Leonardo Richardson and Cheslon Matthews in an interview room. DNA samples were requested from him, which he readily provided. After this was done, another officer by the name of Marius Daniel introduced himself to Mr. Connor. Sgt. Holas was also present and informed Mr. Connor of his desire to interview him. Mr. Connor agreed. Although Mr. Connor states that he was cautioned, he also indicates that he was not aware of the fact that he had the right to an attorney. It was his evidence that he was simply told that he had a right to anyone of his choice being present.

10 Mr. Connor states that he was extremely nervous about explaining anything to the police. This was his first time in such a situation. He states that he did not want to relive the shooting or the fear he felt at that time. Nonetheless, Sgt. Holas asked Mr. Connor some questions and PC Marius wrote them down. Mr. Connor states that he answered the questions, and his answers were also written down. After the interview he was offered something to eat by an officer but declined, as he was feeling anxious at the time.

11 Mr. Connor then states that he was taken into a cell after being booked by a police officer. At the time of being booked, he noticed a flyer which indicated that he had a right to an attorney. He requested that a specific lawyer be contacted for him but was informed by the officer that there was no contact information for lawyers at the police station. I note that PC Ainsley Benjamin gave evidence before me in this case. He acknowledged being the officer at the booking station who processed Mr. Connor. He also acknowledged drawing Mr. Connor's attention to a flyer which indicated what his rights were. This was inclusive of his right to an attorney. It was PC Benjamin's evidence that Mr. Connor indicated that he understood, and this was recorded in writing. It was PC Benjamin's evidence that he had no further dialogue with Mr. Connor. That was in contradiction to what Mr. Connor had to say on the matter. There was also some discrepancy in the timing of PC Benjamin's interactions with Mr. Connor. What can be gleaned from the cross examination of PC Benjamin was that his notes conflict with the timing of Mr. Connor's processing in the station. A question is therefore raised as to whether Mr. Connor was processed prior or subsequent to the interviews under caution.

12 After spending some time in the cell, Mr. Connor was returned to the interview room and questioned further by Sgt. Holas. He states that this was about 1pm. This was confirmed by the time of 13.07 which was placed on the interview form. After the interview was over, Mr. Connor was shown a slipper which he identified as belonging to him. Mr. Connor then received a visit from an attorney, Mr. Devin Hodge (Mr. Hodge), who advised him of his rights in custody. Mr. Connor states that he was subsequently taken back to the interview room and questioned again by Sgt. Holas. This time in the presence of his lawyer. He states that he was questioned about one Jefferson Bontiff, who Sgt. Holas claimed was the one actually responsible for Mr. Gumbs' death. Mr. Connor said he was in fear and did not say anything further to Sgt. Holas. He was then returned to the cell. I note that Mr. Connor was also questioned about Mr. Bontiff during the first interview conducted on 16th February 2020.

13 It is important, at this stage, to highlight an inconsistency in Mr. Connor's account of the incident to the police. During his first interview on 16th February 2020 Mr. Connor was asked a specific question. It was put to him that the police had received some information that he and Mr. Gumbs had some sort of scuffle and/or that Mr. Gumbs used him as a shield to protect himself. It was also put to Mr. Connor that the witnesses informed the police that he fell to the ground. Mr. Connor initially denied this. However, later on in the interview, he acknowledged that he had not told the truth earlier and then gave the account which he had maintained in his witness statement in the case before me. The precise wording of his...