Has today’s hearing int the Bahamas begun, or is it scheduled for later today... Since there is no inquest gag, we should be privvy to whatever goes on?
Date Set For Challenge of Coroners Act
By Quincy Parker
After the inquest into Daniel Smith’s sudden death twice came to a grinding halt, a status hearing in the matter went off on Wednesday without a hitch, and a date has been set for Howard K. Stern to challenge the constitutionality of the Coroners Act.
Daniel, the 20-year-old son of the late Anna Nicole Smith, died of a drug overdose on September 10, 2006, while visiting his mother and newborn half-sister Dannielynn Hope at Doctors Hospital.
Mr. Stern lived with Ms. Smith and claims to be Dannielynn’s father and also claimed to love Daniel “like a brother.” He is also the executor of Ms. Smith’s estate.
Mr. Stern currently has custody of the baby, and continues to live in the Eastern Road mansion he shared with Ms. Smith before she died.
The inquest into Daniel’s death is intended to discover the legal cause of death, whether it was suicide, accident or homicide.
Senior Counsel in the Office of the Attorney General Leo Brathwaite told Chief Magistrate Roger Gomez, who is hearing the inquest, that lawyers for Mr. Stern and the Office of the Attorney General (Wayne Munroe and Bernard Turner, respectively) appeared before Supreme Court Justice John Lyons on Monday.
Mr. Brathwaite said the judge set a date of April 12 for the challenge to be heard, with skeleton submissions and Mr. Stern’s affidavit setting out the grounds on which he is challenging the constitutionality of the Coroners Act due before the judge on Thursday.
The lawyer said the parties expect the matter to be dealt with on April 12.
Once Mr. Stern’s lawyer, Anthony McKinney, had pointed out that the facts of the matter still needed to be agreed – a procedural issue – both sides agreed that the status hearing set for the April 11 ought to go forward.
At that time, the jury will be present, and the lawyers involved will confer and decide on a date for the inquest to resume.
There are 40 names on the witness list for the inquest, which Mr. Gomez has said he expects to take three to four weeks. That timeframe has been completely obliterated, as testimony has not even begun in the inquest.
In fact, two weeks after the inquest started, the only forward step taken in the proceedings is the empanelling of the seven-member jury. Immediately thereafter, Mr. Stern’s legal team brought the inquest to a screeching halt with their challenge to the constitutionality of the Coroners Act.
The act has been on the books since 1910, and was most recently amended in 1993 to set up a sole Chief Coroner and an exclusive Coroners Court.
Mr. Stern wanted the judge in the inquest to issue the jurors a questionnaire, and then allow lawyers to question jurors on their answers to the questionnaire and possibly have people bumped from the jury for cause of partiality.
None of this is possible under the Coroners Act, and according to Mr. Stern, this impossibility may impede his right to a fair trial before an impartial jury. It is on these grounds that he has challenged the act.
A successful challenge of the act may have far-reaching consequences.
http://www.jonesbahamas.com/?c=45&a=12206