A Supreme Court judge has criticised the Department of Public Prosecutions after Crown counsel failed to attend a sentencing hearing.

Puisne Judge Juan Wolffe spoke out as he prepared to sentence former real estate agent Maria Bento, who pleaded guilty to counts of fraud and deception worth more than $120,000 last August.

The hearing was initially set to be heard remotely via Zoom video link, starting yesterday at 9.30am.

However, it was decided on Thursday that the hearing could be heard in person — and the venue was switched to the Dame Lois Browne-Evans Building. Parties were notified by e-mail.

Bento, who is on bail, and her lawyer, Jerome Lynch KC, were in court on time, but when Mr Justice Wolffe took his seat, no DPP lawyer was present.

The department was contacted and Crown counsel Daniel Kitson-Walters did eventually appear.

He explained to Mr Wolffe that the lawyer who had prosecuted the case and was meant to attend today’s hearing was at home — believing that the matter was going to be heard remotely via Zoom.

Mr Kitson-Walters also acknowledged that he was not familiar with the case. He said he thought that counsel for both sides had agreed on a sentence before the hearing.

That prompted Mr Justice Wolffe to say: “The value of you being here is equal to that of a potted plant.”

Acknowledging that Mr Kitson-Walters was “a sacrificial lamb”, the judge went on: “This is a very unhappy state of affairs created solely by the prosecution. It is an abject disrespect to this court.

“I don’t accept the apology at all. It’s vacuous, compounded by the fact that e-mails were sent out. Just take the blame.

“Sometimes the honourable thing to do is say ‘we messed up and we’re sorry we messed up. We dropped the ball’.”

Mr Justice Wolffe, a former DPP prosecutor, suggested that the mix-up was not a one-off.

“I know how things should be working [at the DPP] and they are not — not at all,” he said.

“What frustrates me is when counsel gives excuses that don’t hold water at all.”

Mr Justice Wolffe also asked Mr Kitson-Walters why the DPP still had not submitted a pre-sentence skeleton argument to the court — something it should have done by December 6.

He ordered that the necessary paperwork be filed by the end of today and postponed Bento’s sentencing to February 24.

Cindy Clarke, the Director of Public Prosecutions, later accepted that the incident was “an exceptional departure” from the department’s standards.

Ms Clarke said: “The matter was initially listed for a Zoom hearing but was changed to an in-person hearing less than 24 hours before it was scheduled to be heard.

“The correspondence was not sent to me personally but upon being advised that the court did not have a prosecutor present, I immediately dispatched an officer to man the court and apologise for the error.

“The Crown counsel who attended withstood Justice Wolffe's clear concerns and sought an adjournment, which was ultimately granted.

“All members of my department respect the court’s views. I am committed to maintaining the excellence expected of my office. Operational shortfalls are not frequent and are addressed immediately when it comes to my attention.

“This individual situation reflects an exceptional departure from my department's standards and I remain open to dialogue with the court to ensure that our high standards are maintained.”

It is the second time in two days that the DPP has faced criticism. During arraignments yesterday, several defence lawyers accused the department of failing to disclose pre-trial documents in a timely manner.

After the hearing’s postponement, Mr Lynch described the delay as “massively disappointing” for his client.

He added: “Anybody who, having come over the Christmas and new year period waiting for a sentence, which is on the cusp of whether you go to jail or not ... this is a woman of 50 years of age who is understandably beside herself with anxiety over what is gong to be her future.

“She has pleaded guilty, she’s tried to do the right thing, she’s tried to get some money together to pay some compensation, all of those things.

“But every time you turn up, it goes sour, and it shouldn’t.

“Bear in mind that she was first interviewed on these matters in September 2021. It’s a long time, isn’t it, for anyone to have this hovering over their head and it’s not her making that she’s been delayed in this way.

“It’s not fair and it’s not reasonable, and it’s disappointing that 2025 should start in this way.”

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers