By Tina Comeau
THE VANGUARD
NovaNewsNow.com
The preliminary inquiry of Yarmouth resident Ian Matthew Huskins – who is facing a charge of first-degree murder – did not go ahead as scheduled on Thursday, May 6 and is on hold indefinitely after Huskins’ lawyer had to withdraw from the case due to a perceived conflict of interest.
What this means is the case involving Huskins is essentially back to square one. Huskins, who is charged with the murder of Yarmouth resident Neil Joseph Blades Jr., will be back in court on June 14 as the process will attempt to slowly get back on track. In the next five weeks Huskins will have to look for another lawyer.
It’s unlikely a new date for a preliminary inquiry will be set at his court appearance next month.
Since last September Huskins has been represented by Kentville attorney Chris Manning. A two-day preliminary inquiry was set to go ahead May 6 and 7. Security was tight at the Yarmouth courthouse on Thursday morning. People had to empty their pockets, their bags were searched and they were scanned with metal detectors.
The preliminary inquiry was supposed to get underway at 9 a.m. but after a 45-minute delay Judge Robert Prince came into the courtroom and the explanation of why the preliminary inquiry was being halted was read into the court record. By then the families of Blades and Huskins were aware that the matter was not going to proceed.
Manning explained to the court that he has been assisted in the preparation of Huskins’ case by Annapolis Legal Aid lawyer Darren MacLeod. What has complicated things was last fall MacLeod had met with a co-accused in the case, Jermaine Middleton.
Middleton – who was facing a charge of first-degree murder at the time – had received a certificate through Legal Aid, which allowed him to seek the legal counsel of his choice. The court sought to have a lawyer explain the process to Middleton. No lawyer from Legal Aid in Yarmouth was available so a call was placed to the office in Annapolis County and MacLeod travelled to Yarmouth to meet with Middleton. The purpose of the meeting was not to receive instruction on how to proceed with Middleton’s case, rather it was to explain the seriousness of the charge filed with the court, and the court process that lay ahead.
- Read more special articles :
- - Ian Huskins found not guilty of murder
- - Jury deliberations to resume Friday morning
- - Closing arguments made to the jury
- - No defence evidence called at murder trial
Manning stressed no information about the specifics of the case were raised. It was not, he said, a meeting of a client-lawyer nature.
Still, once Middleton was being represented by lawyer Kevin Burke, Manning told the court he contacted Burke to ensure there was no issue with the fact that MacLeod had met with Middleton. Burke gave a verbal assurance that there was no problem. Manning also sought to receive a written assurance, and asked that the question be posed to Middleton. More verbal assurances were exchanged and again the message that came back was there was no difficulty.
Manning, therefore, continued to represent Huskins and prepare for the preliminary inquiry.
But on Wednesday afternoon, the day before the preliminary inquiry was set to begin, the Crown met with Middleton. The issue of the meeting with MacLeod was raised during that meeting.
Manning told the court on Thursday morning that he wanted to be clear, there is no actual conflict in the case.
“What is being raised is the perception of conflict,” he said, adding he felt there was no choice but for MacLeod to withdraw from the case. And regrettably, Manning added, he felt he had no option but to also withdraw as Huskins’ defence lawyer. Manning called the matter unfortunate and said although the issue, he felt, had been properly addressed several times over the months, it was being raised yet again.
Manning said his client was not pleased by the turn of events, but that he understood.
Judge Prince agreed that given the perception of a conflict it would be inappropriate for Manning to continue as Huskins’ lawyer. Huskins was in the courtroom while the issue was being explained.
Following the court proceeding Crown Attorney Bob Morrison said it was regrettable that the matter has essentially gone back to square one, but he said it is better that the issue be addressed now as opposed to being raised during a trial when it might have led to a mistrial.
Witnesses who were at the courthouse to give evidence at the preliminary inquiry were sent home.
This was the second time a preliminary inquiry in the Blades’ homicide case did not go ahead as scheduled. On the morning that Middleton’s preliminary inquiry was to begin in March the Crown withdrew the charge of first-degree murder and instead charged him with accessory to murder after the fact. Middleton pled guilty to the charge that day, and on April 26 was sentenced to three years in prison. He was given credit of 18 months for the time he had served in custody since his arrest.
A third person charged in the case, Alicia Anderson, received a conditional sentence of two years less a day and house arrest in February after pleading guilty to accessory to murder after the fact.
The facts presented to the court during both sentencing hearings are banned from publication.
Neil Blades was killed in Deerfield on July 11, 2009. His body was discovered the following evening under a bridge on the Eel Lake Road by a local resident.
Huskins was charged with first-degree murder on July 20. He was at large and an arrest warrant was issued. He turned himself into police on Aug. 4 and has been in custody since then.
