Senior Reporter
Attorneys representing Kaia Sealy have successfully challenged the actions of the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service (TTPS) in the retention of her electronic devices following the police shooting of January 20, which left her partner Joshua Samaroo dead.
In addition, Attorneys Fayola Sandy and Keron Ramkhalwhan were able to secure the return of the items to Sealy’s family around 1 pm yesterday.
In the judicial review proceedings filed against the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service and the Justice of the Peace who granted a search warrant authorising the search of Sealy’s devices, they contended that the warrant under which they were seized and authorised to search and extract information from the devices was unlawful.
The claim asserted that there was no evidential basis linking Sealy’s electronic devices to the alleged firearm offence arising from the incident. The proceedings further challenged the continued detention of the devices as unlawful and disproportionate.
They also sought orders quashing the warrant signed on January 29 - nine days after the fatal police shooting in St Augustine, and interim orders were also sought to prohibit the TTPS from extracting any data from either device and to return both, forthwith.
The claim was only filed after the police initially indicated that they would return the electronic devices and failed to adhere to this undertaking.
Upon the filing of the proceedings, the family was contacted and informed that they can collect the devices at 1pm.
Sealy, 24, a mother of one, was left paralysed following the incident, which claimed the life of her common-law husband, Joshua Samaroo, on January 20.
Samaroo, 31, died after being shot multiple times by officers during an alleged confrontation at the corner of Dookiesingh Trace and Bassie Street Extension in St Augustine last month.
The proceedings highlighted that the Administration of Justice (Indictable Proceedings Act) - AJIPA - proclaimed on December 12, 2023, by President Christine Kangaloo, transformed the process for indictable matters and hybrid matters and created a process for police officers to obtain search warrants from Masters. Section 5 of the AJIPA removed the powers previously afforded to JPs to grant search warrants for indictable and/or hybrid offences.
Sealy’s claim also highlighted that the recent amendments to AJIPA by the UNC Government, which will allow for JPs to grant search warrants, have not been proclaimed and therefore, at this time, no JPs have the power to grant search warrants in accordance with AJIPA.
