A Judicious exercise of discretion
On 15th July 2025, an Accra High Court heard the bail pending appeal application of Patricia Asiedua alias Nana Agradaa. In the said apprlication Nana Agradaa who is currently serving a sentence of 15years for charlatanic advertsiement had prayed the court to admit her to bail while her appeal is prosecuted.
It was contended, inter alia, that her appeal is likely to succeed as the trial judge failed to properly evaluate the evidence on record and that the trial judge was biased towards her, and the trial court failed to observe the rules relating to fair trial among others.
In a concise yet well-reasoned ruling, the learned High Court Judge, Dr. Justice Richmond Osei-Hweree- recently nominated for elevation to the Court of Appeal bench- dismissed the application for bail pending appeal. Among others, he held that in light of the 15 years custodial sentence imposed on Nana Agradaa by the trial Circuit Court, the Applicant had failed to demonstrate that the appeal would not be heard before a substantial portion of the sentence is served.
In respect of the Applicant’s allegation relating a breach of fair trial rules, the learned trial judge rule that same could not be sustained at the current stage as that allegation would require a thorough evidentiary inquiry when the appeal is heard by the appellate court. As for the allegation that the learned trial Circuit Court Judge had been biased against her, the learned High Court Judge ruled that no such bias was apparent from the face of the record.
The ruling of the learned High Court Judge was consistent with and reflects a proper application of the prevailing factors or considerations that govern applications of that nature, particularly when bail pending appeal is sought in respect of long custodial sentences and there is no demonstrable breach of jurisdictional rules on the face of the record.
It remains to be seen what course of action Nana Agradaa and her legal team may pursue while the substantive appeal is heard and determined; bearing in mind she has the right of appeal up to the Supreme Court.
Justice served in sycamore tree matter
Two men were sentenced to prison for felling Britain’s beloved Sycamore Gap tree in 2023, an act that a judge said had caused a “sense of loss and confusion across the world.”
The convicts, Daniel Graham, 39, and Adam Carruthers, 32, were each handed sentences of four years and three months during a hearing in Newcastle, in northeastern England.
Under British sentencing rules for the offense they committed- criminal damage- the men could have been given custodial sentence for as little as six months; however Judge Christina Lambert said the “extraordinary social impact” of their crime had made it necessary to increase their punishment.
Judge Lambert said that the Sycamore Gap tree had been a “landmark” for Northumberland and “a symbol of the beauty of its untamed landscape,” and that for many it had been a “place of special personal significance” as the site of marriage proposals and memorials for loved ones.
She said that what had been a haven of “peace and tranquillity to which people returned year after year” was deliberately targeted by Mr. Carruthers and Mr. Graham, who then “reveled in their notoriety” as news spread of what they had done.
The tree, which stood in a picturesque dip along Hadrian’s Wall, the 70-mile fortification that once guarded the northern edge of the Roman Empire, was found illegally cut down in September 2023.
Planted in the 1800s, the towering sycamore was one of Britain’s most photographed trees and featured in the 1991 film “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves.” the BBC
Art collector sued
In a rare dispute that divulges how some artworks worth extraordinary sums of money are sold, an auction house has sued the scion of a sugar fortune after he failed to pay the $14.5 million he had promised for a Jackson Pollock white-on-black drip painting.
Nobody bid on the Pollock during the live auction in November. But in an increasingly common practice, Phillips Auctioneers had previously received a financial commitment from the scion, David Mimran, as a third-party guarantor. Those agreements help auction houses lure expensive artwork by guaranteeing a sale and act as a kind of insurance policy for the seller.
Third-party guarantors agree to buy a painting or sculpture at a set minimum price if it does not sell for more at auction. If the sale goes above that price, the guarantor typically receives a percentage of the upside. That exact percentage is tailored to the agreement, which is usually confidential.
“It’s becoming a tactic that a lot of art collectors are using essentially to make some quick money,” said Mari-Claudia Jiménez, a partner and founder of Withers Art and Advisory. “If they guarantee something that they suspect is going to do very well, they can profit quite handsomely.” The New York Times
Trump sues wall street journal over Jeffrey Esptein article
President Trump has filed a lawsuit against the publisher of “The Wall Street Journal”, alleging the newspaper defamed him in an article about a birthday letter sent to disgraced American financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in the Southern District of Florida, includes as defendants Dow Jones & Co. and its parent company, News Corp. It also names News Corp Chair Emeritus Rupert Murdoch, its chief executive, Robert Thomson, and two Journal reporters.
The suit alleges that the article in question falsely claimed that Trump in 2003 wrote and signed a letter that included a drawing of a naked woman for Epstein. No authentic letter or drawing exists, according to the suit.
“Defendants concocted this story to malign President Trump’s character and integrity and deceptively portray him in a false light,” the lawsuit says.
A Dow Jones spokeswoman said, “We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit.” News Corp didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The wall street journal
