L’ Office Du Tourisme Asks Correctional Court to Convict Attorney at Law Aude Richards for Fraud

April 24, 2012 2:48 PM

Basse Terre:--- The former board members of the Office du Tourisme Maud Gibs, Noreen Brooks, and Josianne Fleming Artsen had their day in court on Monday April 23, 2012 as they sought to vindicate themselves against Attorney at Law Aude Richards.

The three well known women were condemned in 2007 when Attorney at Law Aude Richards used their names to file a court case against the Office du Tourisme (OTS) without their knowledge.

The hearing which was scheduled to begin at 8:30am in the criminal courts in Basse Terre was delayed for two hours because a judge could not attend. Attorney at Law Aude Richards knew that his career is on the line and the outcome of Monday's hearing would determine if he could continue his career as a lawyer. Maitre Richards hired four lawyers, including two Battionier one of which is the chairman of the Bar Association of Guadeloupe. Representing Maitre Richards were Gerard Plumasseau (the chairman of the Bar Association), Gerard Derussy (Battioner) Ernest Daninthe, and Hubert Jabot.

The defense first sought to throw out the case by claiming that Basse Terre is not the jurisdiction for such procedures and secondly they claimed that the Office du Tourisme (OTS) of St. Martin is no longer existing since it was dissolved in 2007 when St. Martin became a collectivity. The lawyers representing Richards went as far as saying that the OTS representative Jeanne Vanterpool is non-existent.

OTS Attorney Stephen Montravers told the court that he is shocked at the defense's claims regarding OTS because Monday's hearing was the third of its kind where Hubert Jabot represented Aude Richards and this is the first time he denied the existence of OTS.

Montravers further explained the judge that the court already gave a ruling in the case when the judge of instruction indicted Maitre Richards and sent the case to the criminal courts.

The President of the court posed several questions to the suspect Aude Richards on Monday. The President asked Richards if he knew the three women. Maitre Richards said Noreen Brooks was his close friend and her father was his client and she eventually became his client, as for Maud Gibs he said he knew her since she was working at the Sous Prefecture of St. Martin while he did not know Josianne Artsen Fleming that well. The judge asked Richards if he was the lawyer for the commune and OTS and if he did not sense a conflict of interest. Richards told the court that Brooks and Gibs approached him at his office and asked him to represent them in a case against OTS but since he was the lawyer for OTS he advised them to hire Maitre Jean Marc Foy. Maitre Richards and his lawyers maintained on Monday that Maitre Richards did not have anything to do with the case instead they cast all the blame on Maitre Foy who is now deceased. The civil parties represented by Maitre Stephen Montravers and Maitre Rioual Rosier insisted that the only person that had personal interest in taking OTS to court was Maitre Richards because he wanted to vindicate his brother who was fired from the OTS for gross misconduct when he plagiarized the Neivre Tourist plan. Montravers presented the court with recent newspapers which showed that Alex Richards just recently committed plagiarism to show that Alex Richards has a pattern of copying other people's work. Montravers further lamented that Maitre Richards actions undermined the entire judicial system since he breached the trust of the court. Montravers urged the court to condemn Maitre Richards for his actions since not doing so would send the wrong message. Montravers even indicated that it is surprising that the chairman of the Bar Association would take a side on the Aude Richards case. He said he is wondering how the Bar Association (Conseil du Orde) would handle the matter if they are asked to take disciplinary measures against Aude Richards if he is convicted. He said it would appear as though lawyers from the Bar of Guadeloupe can do anything and get away with it and if court is lenient with Maitre Richards then he would be better off quitting his job as a lawyer. The statements made by Maitre Montravers caused the Prosecutor of St. Martin, St. Barths and Basse Terre, Christophe Auger to inform the court that no one is above the law. Prosecutor Auger said that he chose to apply the law in the proceeding because he is permitted to do so in defamation cases. The court proceedings became somewhat rowdy on at least three occasions when the lawyers from the defense attacked the civil party lawyers. The President of the court had to call the lawyers to order on several occasions when they were cross-talking. On more than one occasion, the suspect Aude Richards showed arrogance when the lawyers representing the civil parties cross examined him on his role in the case Maitre Foy presented to the courts for him. On at least two occasions, the President of the court reminded Richards that he was not the one to be posing questions instead he was supposed to be answering the questions posed to him by the lawyers representing the victims and OTS.

Maitre Rosier expressed disgust with the defense when they cast all the blame on Maitre Jean Marc Foy (deceased) she said the first victim of Maitre Richards was Maitre Foy because he just presented a case to the court which was prepared by Maitre Richards. Rosier took out several statements made by Maitre Foy when he was questioned by the judge of instruction. She said that Maitre Foy made clear in his declaration that he gave the summons to Maitre Richards so that he could transmit them to his clients (Brooks, Gibs, and Fleming Artsen).

The court's president also cross examined the three victims as to how they learnt of the court proceedings and conviction. They all told the court that they were shocked when they read about their conviction in one of the daily newspapers. They told the judge that they wrote letters to Maitre Richards and once met him in his office as they were looking for an explanation as to how their names were used. All three of the women told the court that they were approached by Maitre Richards to be witnesses for his brother Alex Richards who was fired from OTS. They said Maitre Richards asked for the process verbal of the board meeting held on December 18th 2006 and they gave it to him with the sole intention of assisting his brother who was supposed to file a case against OTS in the labour courts. The lawyers from the defense tried their best to humiliate Noreen Brooks by asking her several questions about the steps she took when she learnt about the case. It was clear that the defense's aim was to discredit Brooks on Monday but they failed when she maintained that she did not authorize anyone to use her name to file a case against the OTS because she was one of the administrators at the time.

The women told the court that their reputation, integrity, and image were totally destroyed by Maitre Richards since two of them were elected officials while Fleming-Artsen was the wife of the Mayor of St. Martin and the President of the University of St. Martin (USM).
 
The three well known women on St. Martin were scandalized in 2007 when they were convicted for taking the Tourist Office to court. However, the women, now victims of Maitre Aude Richards said they were used by Maitre Richards since they never authorized neither hired any lawyer to take the Tourist Office to court. Ever since their conviction Gibs, Brooks, and Fleming Artsen have been engaged in legal battles to clear their names and to find out who used their names to sue the Tourist Office. After a lengthy court investigation, Aude Richards was indicted for fraud while Gibs, Brooks and Fleming Artsen were declared victims.
 
Attorney at Law Aude Richards was indicted on November 18, 2011 to stand trial in the criminal courts for fraud against the Office du Tourisme (OTS) and the three board members when he tried to erase the files for his brother Alex Richards dismissal from the Tourist Office.
 
In February 2007, Maitre Aude Richards, the brother of the former ousted Director of the Office du Tourisme filed an injunction against the Tourist Office using the names of the four of the board members, namely Eric Paul, Noreen Brooks, Maud Gibs, and Josianne Fleming-Artsen. Richards used one of his colleagues, now deceased Maître Jean-Marc FOY to serve the summons to the Tourist Office and one of the board members namely Eric Paul. Richards wanted to appoint an administrator who would have a broad mission to check the accounts of the Tourist Office, for the last five years and to conduct and audit if necessary. Maitre Richards also wanted the adhoc administrator to cancel all decisions taken by the board on December18, 2006 (the day when the board decided to terminate Alex Richards for gross misconduct).

It should be noted that Alex Richards was dismissed from the Office du Tourisme when it was discovered that he plagiarized the Neivre tourist plan and presented it as St. Martin's tourist plan in December 2006. The three board members who were not in support of Alex's dismissal provided internal documents to the Maitre Richards who was the attorney for the commune of St. Martin and the Office du Tourisme hoping he would have used it to assist Alex to contest his dismissal. At no time did the former board members authorize Maitre Aude Richards or Maitre Foy to initiate court procedures against the Office du Tourisme of St. Martin. According to the three victims who were all present in court on Monday, they did not know that Maitre Foy and Richards initiated a court case against the Office du Tourisme and they only learnt of the procedures when they were served with the court's decision informing them that they were condemned. "When we got the decision of the courts we wrote several letters to Maitre Foy requesting information about the procedure, and to find out who hired him. We also asked Maitre Richards a number of times and he did not provide us with any information. We also met with Maitre Foy who eventually told us that he was hired by Maitre Aude Richards to plead the case. Maitre Foy told us that Maitre Richards is the one that prepared the case and he only presented it to the court and served the summons." Josianne Fleming Artsen told the court that they gave Maitre Richards an opportunity to correct the wrong he had done by informing him that he should make a public apology and to pay the fines and court cost. Fleming-Artsen said that Maitre Richards refused to do that and right now it's not about the monies they each lost, but it is more a matter of principle. "Our names and character have been assassinated by Maitre Richards and we are asking this court to find Maitre Richards guilty for the malicious act he committed against us to benefit his brother who is a known for plagiarizing other people's work. On April 1, 2012, Alex Richards plagiarized the political speech from the Prime Minister of Berkina Faso, Luc Adolphe Tiao and gave it to the President of the COM Alain Richardson."
 
The women via their lawyer Maitre RIOUAL.ROSIER asked the court to award them damages for the damage caused to their character as elected persons and to also award them damages for the fraud committed against them. Rosier asked the court to award each of her clients Euros 35,000 for damages, repay them the fines they paid to the tune of Euros 6,000.00 and Euros 4,500.00 for expenses they endured.

Representing the Office du Tourisme was Maitre Stephen Montravers. Montravers told the court that the sacred trust entrusted to lawyers by the bar was breached when Maitre Richards used one of his colleagues to present falsified documents and information to the court to protect his family's personal interest. "The first person that was betrayed was Maitre Foy because as colleagues we trust each other." Montravers further argued that the women in this court also suffered and their trust was abused by Maitre Richards.

Maitre Montravers explained the history of the Tourist Office scandal which involved the board members who were duped by Maitre Richards when he used their names to summons the Tourist Office to court. He further explained that on December 18, 2006 the board of the Tourist Office took several decisions and had it been overturned it would have affected the island negatively and the island's only source of economy which is tourism. He asked the court to condemn Maitre Richards to pay the financial loss endured by the Tourist Office to the tune of € 30,000 for financial loss. Condemn Maitre Richards to pay an equal sum of € 30,000 for moral damages and to also condemn Maitre Richards to pay the Tourist Office the sum of €15,000 under the criminal court's law. The court will render its decision on June 15th 2012. 

(Source: Sxm news)

In the picture above: Victims of Aude Richards: Noreen Brooks-Grant, Maud Gibs and Josianne Fleming with court translator

Attorney at law and Battioner Gerard Derrusy, victims lawyer Maitre Rosier, and OTS lawyer Stephen Montravers.