Barbara Gayle, Justice Coordinator
Attorney-at-law Georgia Gibson Henlin, who represented Kingston attorney-at-law Harold Brady who won his appeal yesterday against his conviction for failing to testify at the commission of enquiry into the Manatt-Coke saga, said that justice was done.
"It was a hard-fought legal battle," she emphasised.
She said one of the bases of Brady's objection was lawyer-client privilege. She said several grounds of appeal were argued and so far "we do not know what the reasons are but we would feel vindicated if that was one of the reasons".
The Court of Appeal, comprising the president, Justice Seymour Panton; Justice Dennis Morrison and Justice Patrick Brooks, has promised to give its reasons in writing at a later date.
Brady's conviction has been quashed, his sentence set aside and a verdict of acquittal has been entered.
The attorney-at-law was convicted in December 2011 by Resident Magistrate Georgianna Fraser. He was fined $500 or 10 days' imprisonment.
He appealed on the grounds that RM Fraser had erred in imposing on him an evidential burden.
Brady had featured prominently in the hiring of US lobby firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, purportedly on behalf of the Jamaica Labour Party, at the height of the Christopher 'Dudus' Coke extradition saga.
When Brady was called to testify at the commission of enquiry, he refused.
Yesterday, Brady told The Gleaner that he had always acted in the interest of his client and had been vindicated by the judges of the Court of Appeal.
"This matter was always one of client's privilege," Brady added.
George Soutar, QC, who represented Brady at the trial, said that a number of legal issues were involved and he was not surprised by the result because the defence had a good case.