– explains interventionDirector of Public Prosecutions, Shalimar Ali-Hack, has refuted allegations that she tried to influence the way Magistrate Yohhanseh Cave was conducting the preliminary inquiry into the murder of former Agriculture Minister Sash Sawh and three others.The DPP,Air Max 90 Essential White And Black Mens, in a letter responding to the allegations, informed that she did not interfere, but admitted that she did intervene in the matter, since her office is vested with constitutional powers to intervene in any criminal matter, whether public or private.According to the DPP, her office is responsible for all criminal matters.“When the Director of Public Prosecutions intervenes in a criminal matter, the Director of Public Prosecutions is carrying out the constitutional function which the Director of Public Prosecutions is appointed to do. The Director of Public Prosecutions is therefore acting lawfully,” she said in her letter to this newspaper.Magistrate Yohhanseh Cave had expressed his concern in open court, stating that the Director of Public Prosecution had attempted to direct him on the subject of his adjournment of the matter.The issue stemmed from Cave adjourning the PI while the late Minister’s brother, Omprakash Sawh, was being cross-examined by defence counsel James Bond.The late Minister’s brother and his wife had returned to Guyana to facilitate the continuation of the Preliminary Inquiry.However, they had indicated that they would not be in the country for any extended period,2018 Nike Air Max 97, and therefore the court should seek to have their testimonies and cross-examination within a specific time-frame.The Magistrate had adjourned the matter to a date last week and the witness, Omprakash Sawh, had indicated that he would be unable to make the appointment since he was required to be back in the United Kingdom where he resided at the time.The Magistrate had urged him to make other travel arrangements since the work of the court was not dependent on his position.According to the Magistrate, he then received a telephone call from the Director of Public Prosecution requesting that he reconsider the date for the continuation of the PI so as to facilitate the witness.At the time of the adjournment, Omprakash Sawh, who happens to be one of the prosecution star witnesses, was being cross-examined by James Bond, counsel for accused David Leander.Magistrate Cave became upset and indicated that he will be taking up the matter with the Chancellor of the Judiciary, since the DPP should not try to influence the way he carried out his work.But explaining her side of the issue,Cheap Authentic Jerseys, the DPP said that she was first contacted by Magistrate Cave in January 2009 at the Chambers by phone.She said that the Magistrate informed her that the case is not getting anywhere, and that he understands that the police are making arrangements for the relatives of the deceased to come to Guyana to testify.According to the DPP,Bobby Doerr Jersey, the Magistrate went on to say that their evidence is formal, and it is a waste of money to bring them to Guyana to testify.But, despite the views of the Magistrate, arrangements were made for the witnesses to come to Guyana to testify.The DPP said that one of the witnesses is Omprakash Sawh, who was present at the scene and saw two of the bandits whom he described in his statement to the police on April 27, 2006, six days after the murders.“The witness himself was a victim, having also being shot at by the bandits whom he described. The witness is not formal and is a main witness for the prosecution,Cheap Jerseys Wholesale,” the DPP pointed out.The witness was granted one week’s leave from his job in England to come to Guyana to testify.The Court was so informed and the witness commenced testifying on Monday February 9, last.But, according to Ali-Hack, the Magistrate then adjourned the matter to Wednesday, February 11, 2009, despite the Police Prosecutor requesting that the matter be continued one day earlier and the Magistrate being told that the witness was only here for the week to testify.The reason why the matter did not continue on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 is that Counsel for the accused could not be present.On the Wednesday the matter was adjourned to the following Tuesday, February 17, 2009 despite the Police Prosecutor again requesting that the matter be adjourned to Thursday, February 12, 2009, so that the witness could continue testifying. And again the adjournment was granted at the request of Counsel for the accused.“At this point I was contacted by the Police Prosecutor. Having been informed of what w