Supreme Court Justice Troadio Gonzalez today did not accept the submission of no case to answer offered by attorney Arthur Saldivar on behalf of Calaney Flowers, who is accused of the August 28, 2012 murder of her ex-boyfriend, Lyndon Morrison, and the attempted murder of his new girlfriend, Sochil Sosa, a Honduran national. Thus, the case continues with the presentation of a defense. Flowers is being tried without a jury. She has been accused of intentionally causing the death of Flowers and attempted death of Sosa, who were on a motorcycle together, by pursuing and knocking them down with her red-colored car outside her former workplace, Atlantic Bank, on Freetown Road in Belize City around 9 at night, then allegedly confessing it to Morrison’s mother. But according to Saldivar, the fact that the judge allowed the case to continue is not the end of the road for his client. He explains why his theory of an accident not involving his client may prove to acquit her:
Arthur Saldivar, Attorney- Calaney Flowers: The main reason is that given the condition of the car, and what the witnesses from the prosecution didn’t say in relation to car or any perceived damage to the car, it didn’t seem to be consistent with a vehicle that was involved in a major or violent collision as was suggested by the prosecution. So given that the issue here is one of murder and attempted murder, and the method to which the prosecution is claiming the offense was committed was in relation to the use of the motor vehicle. Where the prosecution is not showing that there is any point of impact on the car, to show where it collided with the motorcycle then there really is no case to answer. Now, in that regard, the submission was put before the court, there were two witnesses who did suggest in their testimony that they saw a collision. On a prima facie basis, it is appreciated that that may be enough to ask or to call on the accuse to answer. Whether it passes the test of guilt beyond reasonable doubt is another question because then I guess more scrutiny will have to be placed then on the car and what evidence exist to show that that car was in fact involved in a collision.
Primary witness Sochil Sosa had testified they met with Flowers, with whom they had a conversation which allegedly included threats about Morrison and Flowers’ child. The alleged collision took place later, after Sosa noticed Flowers following them. Morrison had told Sosa he was not worried about Flowers, but he also pointed out that he was already going too fast and could not stop. The second plank of a non-Flowers-motivated accident is explained by Saldivar.
Arthur Saldivar, Attorney- Calaney Flowers: It does not seem to me to be a case where Miss Flowers was in fact involved in a collision. All the suggestions in the court, a head on collision with the pickup truck that was coming out of the entrance of the Central Assembly of God gate, because the examiner from the police, mechanic, saying that the front of the bike was bent so that’s where we are with this, and that’s where we’re going with it in relation to our defense for Miss Flowers because ultimately again the only verbal conversation that existed by the witness themselves are saying, listen it was ordinary, there were no threats made, there was no anger, there was no fight, so what would have been the motive at that particular point? Well what happens next is that we prepare her defense and that’s where we go from here.
Morrison’s brother expressed satisfaction at the decision and says the case is not home and dry yet:
Morrison’s Brother: We appreciate and we’re very happy with the judge’s ruling. We maintain and we know what happened, and at the end of the day, nothing is certain. We are happy that this is one hurdle that we have gotten across especially with last week with the media with what they brought across, we got a lot of questioning, a lot of doubt, but a lot of people are also behind us too at the same time telling us that it will work out so it’s a very big hurdle to cross. If anyone will be sitting down in the case even the medical person said that his death was caused by something hitting him and his death was because he being hit. That was documented in court by Doctor Estrada Bran so I guess he has the right to defend his client in any way but it came out in every witness that was there and they said basically the same thing.
The defense will call one witness to tell their version of events. Justice Gonzalez is expected to give a ruling at the conclusion of the case, as sole interpreter of the law and facts. Prosecutor in the case is Crown Counsel, Sheneiza Smith of the DPP’s office.