Court of Appeal Quashes Oscar Selgado Conviction Over Unfair Trial

Tonight, a stunning reversal in one of Belize’s most high-profile criminal cases. The Court of Appeal has quashed the conviction of attorney Oscar Selgado, who was serving a ten-year sentence for abetment of murder. The judges ruled that his trial was fundamentally unfair, raising serious questions about missing evidence, hearsay testimony, and the integrity of the judicial process. Selgado was accused of soliciting the murder of Marilyn Barnes, a key witness in a disciplinary hearing that could have led to his disbarment. Prosecutors claimed he offered free legal services to Giovanni Ramirez in exchange for carrying out the killing. But the entire case hinged on Ramirez’s statement, and he never appeared in court. His testimony came in as hearsay, after the trial judge accepted that Ramirez was too fearful to testify. The appellate judges weren’t convinced. They found that the trial judge admitted highly prejudicial evidence with little probative value and failed to ensure fairness when the defense couldn’t cross-examine its accuser. They also flagged troubling gaps: critical video recordings vanished from court custody, and voice identification was relied on despite its inherent weakness. In a scathing judgment, the Court said, quote, ‘Justice required more.’ They ruled that the process breached Selgado’s constitutional right to a fair trial and ordered an acquittal, no retrial, citing Ramirez’s unavailability. This decision raises big questions: How did key evidence go missing? Why wasn’t Ramirez subpoenaed or offered virtual testimony? And what does this mean for public confidence in Belize’s justice system?

 

Michelle Trapp, Attorney-at-law

“From the appeal, the hearing of the appeal and from the questions that were asked, from that day, we sensed that the court was seeing our arguments as it relates to fairness of the trial and, in particular, when it comes to the adducing of the recording into evidence. Those recordings, asking the question whether or not the admission of those recordings was fair, and you look at everything in totality, whether or not Mr. Selgado had a fair trial. We sensed [that], okay, it went well; however, you never know because until the judgment is handed down. But we were optimistic, we were prayerful. Mr. Selgado is a colleague, he’s a friend, and we looked at this case from the standpoint that if that kind of injustice could happen to a colleague, an attorney-at-law, my God, what could happen to a regular citizen who has no knowledge of the law?”