Court Remand

I appeared in court this morning as a state witness. It was robbery, and the man had confessed to the crime. The CID had his confession on digital stereo audio. This was the second time I appeared in connection with this case -- and I travelled a long way to be there. The first time, the case was postponed -- chiefly because no one had checked the audio (they said), and this was critical evidence. The prosecutor sincerely apologised to me at the time. Today there was another prosecutor. This time round, he took me aside before the court convened. He said: "I'm not prepared for this case." Looking at the docket, it was clear to me that some things were not there -- but I was in a muddle at this point. I hadn't made sense of it all. In court therefore, the prosecutor, the defence, and the magistrate spoke in turn -- and in five minutes the matter had been struck off the roll. This was on the grounds that the accused had the right to an efficient trial, and this (said the defence) wasn't happening. The prosecutor asked me if he could see me afterwards. I said I was a state witness, but I hadn't said a word from start to finish. He explained that this was a remand. He wanted to assure me that there was no subversion of justice. It was simply as if, he said, all of this hadn't happened -- we would need to start again when we had a "complete case" -- and he sincerely apologised. OBSERVATION: No wonder, someone said after court, that people take the law into their own hands in this country. (This was not the end of the story -- more in a forthcoming post).