DPP files appeal in the case against Attorney Oscar Selgado

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has taken steps to challenge a recent Court of Appeal ruling that overturned a conviction in a high-profile criminal case, confirming plans to take the matter to the Caribbean Court of Justice.  In a filing to the CCJ, the DPP applied for special leave to appeal the December 19, 2025, decision of the Court of Appeal, which allowed the appeal and entered a verdict of acquittal. Back on December 22, 2025, Director of Public Prosecutions Cheryl-Lynn Vidal reacted to the ruling and indicated that her office would seek further review before the region’s highest court.

Cheryl-Lynn Vidal,  Director of Public Prosecutions: “It was not surprising. I anticipated this outcome given the way in which the oral hearing itself went. So I was really just looking forward to the judgment so that I could finalize my application for leave to appeal to the Caribbean Court of Justice. We’ve been in this position before and we’ve taken it to a higher court and succeeded. Regardless of how emphatic the judgment appears to be a different court might have a different view. We have 42 days from today within which to make an application for special leave to appeal. And then the timetable really is at the discretion of the court. The court will determine the next steps. So it is not something that happens automatically. If we succeed in getting leave, then there will be further case management of the appeal once it’s filed and then a timeline will be set by the court. In the interest of justice, and that is my function to seek after justice not just for the immediate victims, but for society as a whole because society is the ultimate victim of crime. In this particular case when we did the sentence in hearing and Miss Bonds gave her victim impact statement and explained what this offense meant to her, how it affected her, how the way she described it ruined her life and the life of her family. If I believe that there may have been errors in this judgment that a higher court should look at, then it is my duty to take the matter further.”

The Oscar Selgado matter stems from the prosecution of the attorney who had been convicted in the High Court of abetment of murder and sentenced to ten years imprisonment after a trial before Justice Nigel Pilgrim.  Prosecutors alleged Selgado solicited a man, Giovanni Ramirez, to kill a former client who had filed a complaint against him before the General Legal Council. According to the Crown’s case, meetings took place inside Selgado’s vehicle, during which money was allegedly provided to facilitate the killing and the intended victim’s home was pointed out. However, Ramirez later reported the matter to police and provided a recorded statement but refused to testify at trial, saying he feared for his life. The trial judge admitted his statement into evidence on the basis that the witness was in fear. The Court of Appeal later overturned the conviction, ruling that the statement should not have been admitted because its prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value and raises concerns about reliability. The DPP argues the appellate court misapplied the law on hearsay evidence and improperly interfered with factual findings of the trial judge; issues she says are important enough for determination by the Caribbean Court of Justice. If the CCJ grants special leave, the regional court will make the final determination on whether the acquittal stands.