As the Adrian Gibson trial continued today, defense lawyers passionately argued that their clients might not receive a fair trial due to what they perceive as biased media coverage.
The crux of their objection lies in the use of the term "corruption," which they claim is prejudicial, considering none of the charges brought against the defendants are explicitly related to corruption.
During the proceedings, the defense further requested the dismissal of the jury, contending that exposure to media reports may influence their impartiality. They argued that the jury, having heard prejudicial information, cannot "un-hear" it, jeopardizing the integrity of the trial.
Additionally, the defense raised concerns about the testimony of Water and Sewerage Corporation (WSC) employee Mynez Sherman, arguing that she has at times overstated her evidence by delving beyond the scope of the questions posed.
They alleged that Sherman's comments appear to be motivated by a personal vendetta against one of the defendants, former WSC General Manager Elwood Donaldson.
In response, Justice Cheryl Grant-Thompson addressed Sherman's attempts to clarify her answers, emphasizing it as a measure to protect her professional integrity.
Despite the defense's request, Grant-Thompson refused to dismiss the jury but agreed to rule on a potential gag order by Thursday.
Lawyers representing the defense are fervently seeking a gag order to restrict media coverage, presenting articles from the Nassau Guardian and the Gallery for the judge's scrutiny.
Also highlighted were instances of misinformation in social media and news outlets like ZNS and Eyewitness News, where terms such as "corruption," "kickbacks," and "receiving payments" were allegedly misused.
The trial involves Adrian Gibson, the former executive chairman of Water and Sewerage Corporation, Donaldson, former general manager of the corporation, and others.
The case continues to unfold with heightened tension, awaiting Justice Cheryl Grant-Thompson's ruling on the gag order.