Viera sentence.

In the line of attack were Opposition leader Mr. Frederick Wade and other lawyers.

Mr. Dunch labelled the outcry over the $4,000 fine -- and handling of the case -- as "shameful''.

He said the criticism was ill-informed, and ignored precedents set by similar cases.

"I am appalled that any member of the Bermuda Bar should see fit to adversely comment upon a sentence meted out by the judiciary in any case in which that particular member of the Bar has not been personally involved.'' Mr. Dunch went on to line Mr. Wade in his sights.

"Candidly I am astonished Mr. Wade should be taking the stance he is, bearing in mind I was instructed that at one time he was actually prepared to take the stand as a character witness for Mr. Viera.

"Although he himself informed me he had been subsequently dissuaded from doing so by caucus colleagues.

"I am also aware from my instructions Mr. Wade as an individual owes a considerable debt of gratitude to Mr. Viera in terms of assistance Mr. Viera has rendered him personally in the past.'' The leading lawyer's outburst comes as the Progressive Labour Party prepares to discuss the sentence.

PLP leader Mr. Wade said he had been bombarded by criticism of the fine handed out by Acting Senior Magistrate the Wor. Cheryl-Ann Mapp.

Ex-Independent MP Mr. Viera was fined last month for five firearms offences.

The most serious charge was possessing a .38 calibre, six-shot Smith and Wesson revolver.

Mr. Wade said Bermudians were upset over how the Prosecution had handled the case.

They believed it highlighted racism in the justice system.

The Royal Gazette has also received several angry letters over the sentence.

Said Mr. Wade: "People have questioned the sentence, but more are angry over the process.'' Bermudians wanted to know why the case was heard before a magistrate, and not a Supreme Court judge, Mr. Wade added.

They also questioned why the Prosecutor was a Policeman -- not a Crown Counsel.

And there was puzzlement over why the Prosecution had not recommended prison.

Mr. Wade, a lawyer, said Bermudians believed there was one law for whites, another for blacks.

Personally, he was surprised why a Policeman prosecuted the case.

"One would have thought it could have been dealt with by a Crown Counsel.'' Mr. Wade said he would be discussing the matter with members of the Opposition's caucus. It could be raised in the House of Assembly.

Lawyer Mr. Philip Perinchief was also critical of the sentence.

"What kind of message or precedent has that kind of a decision sent to the community?'' And lawyer Mr. Rod Attride-Stirling commented: "I couldn't help thinking that if the defendant had been a black Bermudian he would have been incarcerated.'' Mr. Dunch, however, hit back: "I think it is extremely unfortunate that this case continues to be subject to discussion in the Press when one bears in mind that those who seem to be making the majority of the comment have no true understanding or appreciation of the facts and precedents that were put before the Acting Senior Magistrate in the course of mitigation.

"I am particularly disturbed over the fact that several members of the Bermuda Bar have seen fit to be critical of both the judicial process and the sentence when they speak from a complete absence of knowledge in terms of both fact and precedent.'' He added: "In my view it is certainly contemptuous of the court and does not enhance the reputation of the Bar as a whole.

"I find it particularly perturbing the leader of the Opposition should have made the comments that he has bearing in mind his role as a criminal defence lawyer. He should know better than to comment on matters he has had no involvement in.

"In his role as a legislator he should appreciate better than most the deliberate separation between the judicial process and the legislative process.

"And he should appreciate just how wrong it is to attempt to lever the judicial process through the use of politics.'' Mr. Dunch hit back at claims there was one law for whites and another for blacks. "At the time mitigation was proffered I drew the Acting Senior Magistrate's attention to five similar cases.'' These included those of: Rudolpho Bacchetti, a white man bound over in the sum of $500 to keep the peace for possessing a firearm; Alphonso Eastmond, a black man fined $1,000 for possessing a loaded revolver; Jody Mello, a black man fined $400 for possessing two firearms and ammunition; James Conyers, fined $250 for possessing a firearm used for threatening individuals; and A man fined recently for possessing a "BB gun''.

"Terms of imprisonment have only been imposed where firearms have been used or had been used for the commission of other offences,'' stressed Mr. Dunch.

"Based on the precedents that exist to date it would have been entirely surprising if this matter had been dealt with in the Supreme Court and equally surprising had it involved a leading Crown Counsel from the Attorney General's chambers.

"In short the Viera case was entirely consistent with that which has occurred in the past.''