The “Chucky” Hansen Saga: A Timeline

If there is anything that has consumed Virgin Islands’ politics in the last few weeks, it must be the Brian v. Fawkes court battle that saw the St. Croix District Board of Elections Chairman, Adelbert Bryan, suing the Elections Supervisor, Caroline Fawkes. Bryan alleged that beleaguered senator Alicia “Chucky” Hansen was not qualified to be on the Nov. 4 ballot because of crimes she committed that fell under the “moral turpitude” umbrella.

And so it began. First, the Superior Court of the Virgin Islands ruled in Sen. Hansen’s favor, stating she was eligible to be placed on the ballot, but Bryan did not stop there. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands and that was when the real action took off. The High opined that, “Senator Hansen’s failure to file tax returns is a crime involving moral turpitude that renders her ineligible to serve in the 31st Legislature. Thus, we reverse the Superior Court’s July 13th, 2014 order and direct the Superior Court to grant Bryan’s petition, and remove Hansen from the General Election’s ballot.”

No one knew what turn the story would take from there, but we would soon find out. Hansen’s attorney, Lee Rohn, immediately called on the governor to pardon her client, and both Virgin Islanders and pundits alike cemented in their minds that Governor de Jongh would pardon the embattled senator, especially after strongly hinting he would do so in a press release made available to the public on August 31, 2014. The governor said in the release that St. Croix voters knew of Hansen’s convictions of willfully failing to file her taxes, yet they voted her into office for the 29th and 30th Legislatures. The governor also revealed he had instructed Attorney General Vincent Frazer to look into the issues presented by the Supreme Court and to also examine Hansen’s request for a pardon.

The wait was not long. 

On Sept. 3, 2014, Governor de Jongh pardoned Senator Hansen, a move that sent the Virgin Islands into somewhat of a tailspin, with many residents expressing disbelief at what was unfolding before their eyes. Swiftly, almost like clockwork, Hansen’s attorneys determined the governor’s pardon was retroactive and had “cured” all the veteran senator’s “ills,” which then made her, in their minds, an eligible candidate for the November 4 General Election.

Consequently, the Board of Elections was sued by Hansen and her supporters, alleging that because Governor de Jongh’s pardon had cured Hansen’s crimes, Supervisor of Elections Caroline Fawkes should have placed her name back on the ballot. The case was taken to the District Court of the Virgin Islands, presided over by Chief Justice Wilma A. Lewis, and after hearing testimonies from both sides–which were essentially the same–as the Attorney General’s Office, representing Caroline Fawkes, had no objections to the plaintiffs’ case except that Fawkes was given an order by the Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands to remove Hansen’s name from the ballot, and that is what she followed. In fact, the apparent collusion between the plaintiffs and the defendant was so evident that even Judge Lewis asked whether there was any difference in their cases. Both sides agreed there was “fundamentally” no difference in their arguments.

Unconvinced that the plaintiffs had enough evidence to prove Governor de Jongh’s pardon was retroactive, on Sept. 10, Judge Lewis gave Lee Rohn and her team four hours to return to the court with evidence supporting their claim that Hansen should be placed back on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Things went silent for almost two days, but on the morning of Fri., Sept. 12, Judge Lewis granted Sen. Alicia “Chucky” Hansen a temporary restraining order, and ordered the Supervisor of Elections to place Hansen’s name back on the ballot.

Meanwhile, just one day before Judge Lewis’ order was released, the Attorney General filed a motion with the Supreme Court to rehear the Brian v. Fawkes case; however, on the night of Fri., Sept. 12, the Supreme Court denied the rehearing and reaffirmed its stance that Hansen was not eligible to run for office on November 4.

When exercising jurisdiction over cases requiring the application of Virgin Islands Law, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has instructed the Virgin Islands District Court to predict how the Supreme Court of the Virgin Islands would decide an issue of territorial law, and should seek guidance from the Superior Court decisions in undertaking this endeavor. In essence, the Pennsylvania-based Third Circuit Court of Appeals gives the V.I. District Court the power to rule how it predicts the V.I. Supreme Court would rule in a given case. This is the case with all U.S. Courts.

On Sun., Sept. 14, the VI Consortium reported, through information received from our sources, that Judge Lewis had ruled the night before, on Sat., Sept. 13, to dissolve the temporary restraining order she had granted Hansen on Fri., Sept. 12. Our sources informed us that the ruling would have been made public on Mon., Sept. 15, but to date, Judge Lewis has not revealed her ruling.

Some have speculated Judge Lewis’ opinion was held back because of our report that preempted it; however, we cannot confirm those speculations. Many have also asked why we have not retracted our story and the simple answer is this–we stand by our original report and believe that whenever Justice Lewis’ ruling is made public, it will fall in line with what we know the law to be.

What Happens Next

Judge Lewis’ temporary restraining order comes to an end on Sept. 26, which is this coming Friday, and a ruling should be released on or before that date. To that end, we expect this week will mark yet another important set of events in the seemingly ever-unfolding “Chucky” Hansen political saga.

The VI Consortium will continue coverage of this story as it unfolds.