Usually when we hear names like Sheldon Pinky Tillett and Micah Thompson at court, it's because they're being charged for something major.
But today the reputed George Street dons, along with a third man Charles Woodeye were the ones suing the government - and they did so in the Supreme Court. Woodeye is in the blue shirt, Micah Thompson is behind him in a plaid short, and Pinky Tillett wears the white T-Shirt.
The three men are suing because they claim they are victims of false arrest and imprisonment - that's after they spent almost one year on remand for a murder in which there was no evidence to implicate them.
That happened in February of 2009 when John Paul Saldivar was killed on northern Ambergris Caye in a drug related murder. That same night police found Thompson, Tillett and Woodeye on San Pedro, put two and two together and concluded they were somehow connected to the killing.
But the attorney for the three men, Agnes Segura Gillett says that there was nothing to implicate her clients.
They didn't have any weapons or drugs; only Pinky Tillett was found with 1,800 US dollars in cash.
Five witness statements were gathered from three witnesses and none of them named any of the three men.
In the courtroom of Justice Minnette Hafiz today, Segura-Gillett shredded the testimony of the only witness offered by the Govrnment, Inspector Dennis Arnold. She got him to confirm that despite the fact that he gave the order for arrest - at no time were the names of Tillett, Thompson or Woodeye mentioned by any of the witnesses.
She also demonstrated that even the director of Public Prosecutions expressed grave reservations about the case - telling Arnold in a letter that she was not clear as to why the three men were charged.
In fact when the murder case was withdrawn in January of 2010 the DPP told us, quote: "from the outset there was no evidence against certain of the persons. The evidence the police used was desperately unreliable."
Indeed, the evidence shown in court today indicated that all three men seem to have been charged on a hunch rather than solid evidence.
Now, the three men say they want to be paid damages for those 11 plus months spent on remand without evidence.
Both sides will send in final submissions in writing and by September and judgment will be delivered sometime after that.
As regards damages, it is of note that a recent judgment from Hafiz found that a policeman who was unlawfully detained for 18 days was entitled to twenty thousand dollars in damages.
Government also recently settled a case of wrongful imprisonment with an alleged bank robber for a hundred thousand dollars.
