By LEANDRA ROLLE
Tribune Staff Reporter
lrolle@tribunemedia.net
THE attorney representing the man accused of defaming Long Island MP Adrian Gibson has requested that Mr Gibson’s ex-fiancée be summoned to court to give evidence in the case.
Ian Cargill made the request after raising concerns with some parts of Mr Gibson’s testimony on Friday in the intentional libel trial of his client, Gregory Miller before Chief Magistrate Joyann Ferguson-Pratt.
Miller is accused of transferring $200 to Mr Gibson’s Royal Bank of Canada account that he shared with his ex-fiancée at the time, in an attempt to defame him in December 2018. He is also charged with intentional libel.
While on the witness stand earlier this month, Mr Gibson testified that he was taken aback when he saw a $200 deposit from Miller’s company, Apex Underground Utilities.
As a result, the Long Island MP said he contacted his bank and later called for an investigation.
According to Mr Gibson, Mr Miller’s company was one of the several entities that had submitted bids for a Water and Sewerage Corporation contract in Long Island. Ultimately, he did not receive the contract.
The former WSC chairman told the court he believed the deposit was meant to entrap him because he claimed it was transferred on the same date that the Long Island tenders came out.
He took the witness stand again Friday for cross-examination, which was conducted by the Crown prosecutor in the case, ASP Clifford Daxon.
When asked whether he had any interactions with Mr Miller, Mr Gibson recalled that he spoke with the accused sometime in 2018 or 2019 on a WSC conference call concerning “the retention of a Pinewood project.”
About a year earlier, he said Miller approached him while he was having lunch with a church overseer.
He told the court he believed the defendant did this because “word on the street” at the time was that he was set to be appointed the WSC executive chairman.
However, Mr Cargill interjected, arguing the remarks were “hearsay.”
Magistrate Ferguson-Pratt agreed and cautioned Mr Gibson.
She also questioned him further about the alleged bank transaction and how he came to the conclusion that someone was trying to “entrap” him.
“I am trying to ascertain how would anyone know your bank account information,” the chief magistrate said on Friday. “I must know what the premise (for this) case is and in trying to determine that, I am trying to ascertain the factual matrix.”
“Based on the evidence, which this witness gave, the court wants to be clear on how did he come to form the view that someone entrapped him.”
In response, Mr Gibson said he could not speculate as to the “defendant’s thinking” and could only assume the accused got the information from someone working at the bank.
Mr Cargill then conceded that Mr Gibson’s response was “irrelevant” as his former fiancée, with whom he shared the account, was not present in court to give evidence on exactly what happened.
“If there are two persons who may appear on the account, I may not know why the funds were not there, but the other person is not there so you can’t feel that someone is trying to entrap me when somebody else is also on that account and you don’t know the relationship between that person and the other person,” the lawyer argued.
“So the only thing I can now ask is that person be summoned to come to court. That’s the only way we can know.”
Gibson, who is facing several bribery charges in connection with his tenure as WSC chairman, will return to court in relation to this case on August 26.
The case will continue at 11 am.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.