Angelique Blin arrives for her Royal Court trial with defence counsel Advocate Peter Ferbrache. (Photo credit Steve Sarre of the Guernsey Press)
The trial in Guernsey of Angelique Blin, who trades under the name Overseas Angels as an immigration adviser, on fraud and theft charges was spectacularly adjourned Tuesday after the jurats (jury) were split on evidence of possible mental health problems and Judge Russell Finch ruled that she [Blin] should undergo psychiatric tests.
There is to be an evaluation hearing in the Royal Courts in August to see whether she is then fit to plead and stand trial.
Report by Zoe Ash of the Guernsey Press - reader's comments at the end
Blin is facing seven charges of deception with an alternative of seven counts of theft of £26,000 (PhP 1.7-M) after allegations were made to Guernsey's fraud squad from clients of Blin who had paid to obtain visas and/or work permits to enter or remain in the UK. Some of the complainants are Filipino.
This unique case of a woman who claimed to be unfit to plead split the jurats and left the presiding judge with the deciding vote after they heard she "...hears voices that are not there...".
After four hours of deliberation, the jurats were split 4-4 on whether immigration adviser Angelique Blin was mentally capable of standing trial. As the jurats were a man down on the second day of the trial due to illness,
Judge Russell Finch had the casting vote and agreed with the defence that Miss Blin was not fit to stand trial.
The 49-year-old, of Overseas Angels, stood accused of seven counts of deception, or an alternative of theft, totalling £26,000 over 18 months in 2007 and 2008.
Representing Miss Blin, Advocate Peter Ferbrache had told the Royal Court he believed his client was not fit to plead. Following Judge Finch¹s vote, and based on 1961 legislation, Crown Advocate Fiona Russell, prosecuting, then said Miss Blin had to be detained in the Castel Hospital.
But when viewed in conjunction with recent human rights legislation Judge Finch took the decision that this was not necessary. Advocate Ferbrache said detaining Miss Blin would be "dim and dark, like something out of a Dickens novel".
He told the court she was not a danger to the public and her bail conditions should continue to include one that she complied with a consultant psychiatrist. Mrs Russell argued that if someone was not able to look after their affairs, compulsory treatment was needed but Mr Finch said the defendant¹s condition was "not sufficiently serious to warrant detention".
He adjourned the case for the consultant psychiatrist at the Castel Hospital to be informed and for direction of treatment to be assessed.
In summing up, Judge Finch told the jurats the only question was whether the defendant was under such a disability of mind that she was not fit to be tried. He said there were five criteria to bear in mind that the defendant
understood the charge, could decide a plea, instruct her advocate, follow the course of the proceedings and give evidence in her own defence.
"The client must be able to convey intelligently the course she wants to follow and what she wants to put forward in her defence," said Judge Finch. He said it was imperative that, to go ahead, Miss Blin could understand the
lawyers¹ questions and apply her mind to answering them.
"The mere fact that the defendant is highly abnormal is oblique. They may not be insane, but still unfit to plead" he said.
Jurats took into account evidence given by two psychologists, Dr Saal Seneviratne from the UK at the request of the defence and Dr Quazi Haque on behalf of the Crown.
While they agreed Miss Blin needed treatment for mental health issues, they disagreed as to the extent her alcohol dependency affected her problems.
Dr Seneviratne said it was secondary to a condition called "thought disorder¹. He said his theory was supported by emails between Miss Blin and her defence team. Sentences and arguments were illogical in their formation and often completely irrelevant to the matter in hand.
Blin's defense counsel, advocate Peter Ferbrache, argued before the court that his client was unfit to comprehend the evidence against her and that in her present state she was mentally incompetent to stand trial, with evidence being given that she was psychotic. Both Peter Ferbrache and Crown Prosecutor Fiona Russell produced specialist evidence regarding Blin's mental state.
Advocate Peter Ferbrache, defending, told the Royal Court his client had failed to give proper instruction for him to act as her defence and she did not understand the details of the evidence. He asked the court for the case
to be adjourned for psychiatric treatment. As part of the case, she would have to be questioned and cross-examined.
"There is no way in a hundred million years that Miss Blin is capable of doing that at the moment," he said.
Advocate Ferbrache said "It would be a joy to behold" if she did take the stand, as it would take hours to get an answer to the simplest of questions. To be fit to plead, the client must be an active and meaningful participant
in the trial and be able properly to instruct their lawyer as to their defence, he said.
He said it was a unique case and he and Ozannes (the law firm representing Blin) colleague Patrick Barry had
raised considerable concern earlier this year about her ability to understand the 10-day trial. They asked Miss Blin to see leading Harley Street psychologist Dr Saal Seneviratne, who spoke via a video link from Uxbridge Magistrate¹s Court in West London.
"I do not believe she is currently able to meet the required standard and cannot be involved in this court process,¹ he said. "She believes that evidence against her is part of a conspiracy. She believes she has been framed," said Dr Senevirante.
He said that, going through emails between Miss Blin and Mr Barry, it was clear that because of the way the sentences and arguments were constructed, and combined with speaking to her, he concluded there was evidence of "thought disorder".
Miss Blin told the psychologist she believed police in both the UK and Guernsey would ring during the night and that she was also being harassed by a Filipino website, Balita Pinoy.
"The police possibly were ringing her in the middle of the night demanding money but, combined with everything else, I had a strong suspicion that she could hear voices speaking with her over the phone that were not there," he
said.
"Although the information she gave me was jumbled up and difficult to follow, I did not believe she was trying to mislead me."
Dr Seneviratne said Miss Blin could not provide logical information and had an inflated view of herself, which had led her to believe she was being targeted in a conspiracy.
"She said some quite amazing things which I found quite impossible to comprehend."
He concluded she was suffering from delusional disorder, and this was aggravated by an alcohol addiction Miss Blin claims to drink four bottles of wine a day.
Dr Seneviratne conceded that a UK judge had not questioned her mental state when she stood trial a month ago in London on similar charges.
"I have had to balance this up but I would err on the side of caution and recommend treatment. I¹m not giving her an excuse to never stand trial, she can return to the court at some point in the future," he said.
Crown Advocate Fiona Russell, prosecuting, said the fact that Miss Blin had stood trial in London meant the case should go ahead. She had requested Miss Blin see an independent psychiatrist in Guernsey, Dr Quazi Haque, who "clearly identified a significant problem with alcohol" as a primary reason for her problems.
Dr Seneviratne said the only way to know whether Miss Blin¹s problems were purely down to her alcohol addiction was for her to receive treatment.
"My belief is that those problems will be present when she is clean and sober. While we did not agree on the nature of the disorder we do agree that she has a psychotic illness that needs treatment," said Dr Seneviratne.
Ozannes solicitor Patrick Barry received up to 29 e-mails and 10 phone calls a day from Miss Blin after the company took on her case in August 2009. After 110 hours, Mr Barry has yet to receive enough relevant information
from Miss Blin to form a statement something that would ordinarily take between 15 and 20 hours.
"It has been impossible. Of the many hundreds of e-mails received, only 20 were in some way relevant to the statement, most of these were very personal matters that I was not able to advise on", said Mr Barry.
Despite this, Mr Barry said he maintained a good working relationship with Miss Blin but, said Advocate Ferbrache, it became clear she was unable to comprehend what was going on.
"Under no circumstances do I feel we are adequately prepared because we have not been given coherent instruction," said Mr Barry.
The court was then adjourned until August when pleas and directions will be resumed.
Posted at: 05:40 | Add Comment
| 
| 
del.icio.us