{"id":142078,"date":"2021-11-23T11:35:00","date_gmt":"2021-11-23T15:35:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/antiguanewsroom.com\/?p=142078"},"modified":"2021-11-23T12:31:39","modified_gmt":"2021-11-23T16:31:39","slug":"upp-3-win-bus-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/antiguanewsroom.com\/upp-3-win-bus-case\/","title":{"rendered":"UPP 3 win bus case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a><\/div>
\"\"<\/a><\/div>

BUS CASE UPDATE:<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n

The Judge has ruled that the defendants were NOT employed in the public service, hence the larceny charges were dropped.<\/p>\n

On the charges of conversion, the Judge ruled that the prosecution failed to prove that the government owned the buses and were relying on inferences and not a forum of fact, hence the conversion charges failed.<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>
\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n

The Judge ruled in favour of the defendants. In courts 1, 4, & 7 the No Case Submission is upheld.<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n

On the express evidence for the purpose 2, 5, & 8 the No Case Submission was upheld.<\/p>\n

On Courts 3, 6, & 9 the No Case Submission was upheld.<\/p>

\"\"<\/a><\/div>\n