A Jamaican judge has reserved her judgment for next week Tuesday about whether the case against Antigua and Barbuda’s Director of Public Prosecution Anthony Armstrong will be thrown out of court.

The attorneys representing the embattle DPP made a submission in court to have the matter thrown out, saying that the prosecution’s case was weak and lacked proper evidence.

Anthony Armstrong is facing charges in his homeland of fraudulent conversion and conspiracy to defraud, as well as three counts each of uttering forged documents and forgery.

According to a report that appeared in an online publication tonight, Armstrong’s lawyer Hugh Wildman said he was confident that the judge will throw the case out.

“When we met in court today [Monday], we were able to demonstrate that Mr. Armstrong did not sell any property as was alleged. In fact, the property was sold by the complainant’s cousin. He will be a free man by next week. Based on the evidence and submission that we were able to demonstrate before the court, I believe we proved that there was no evidence implicating him in any illegal activity,” he reportedly told Newsco.

Armstrong found himself in trouble with the law after he was arrested and charged on his arrival in Jamaica with fraudulent conversion, conspiracy to defraud as well as three counts each of uttering forged documents and forgery.

He is accused of selling three properties without the consent of his client to whom they belonged.

In court, the complainant claimed that the lawyer had admitted to selling the three properties behind his back and had promised he would repay him “if it’s the last thing he did”.

The claimant further alleged that Armstrong repaid him US$15,450 between September 2006 and April 2007 through a third party from Antigua.

According to the allegations, the complainant met Armstrong through his cousin’s husband and retained him in 1999 to act as his lawyer during the land purchase.

Two of the properties were in St Andrew while the other was in St Ann.

After the completion of the land transaction, the complainant ran afoul of the law in 2003 and was incarcerated for 15 years in the US.

While in prison his relatives allegedly showed him documents indicating that his properties had been sold.

Following the complainant’s release, it is alleged that he had a telephone conversation with Armstrong in which he (Armstrong) admitted to selling his properties and promised to repay him.

It is further alleged that Armstrong was given time by the complainant to make the payments.

The complainant alleged that after collecting partial payments in 2006 and 2007, he was unable to contact Armstrong.

The complainant consequently reported the matter in 2018.

Armstrong’s lawyer Hugh Wildman is, however, contending that his client wasn’t the person who sold the properties.