Today, while most were having a light workday, getting ready for the 4-day Easter Holiday weekend, the judges of the Caribbean Court of Justice were putting in work. This afternoon, they produced two judgments in appeal cases that they have already heard.
We start first with their decision in the appeal of Gregory August, who's been serving what was originally a life sentence for murder. As we told you, he was convicted in November 2012 of the murder of 73 year-old Alvin Robinson.
The elderly disabled man was fatally stabbed 9 times in the face and neck in 2009, and, in 2012, August was found guilty and sentenced to life behind bars.
August challenged the constitutionality of that mandatory life sentence for murder conviction, and in November 2016, he got a landmark judgment from the Court of Appeal. Those judges found that automatic life sentence for a convicted murderer is too harsh and inhumane.
He then went on to challenge the conviction itself at the Court of Appeal, but he was unsuccessful in convincing that court that the circumstantial evidence against him was not strong enough to prove that he killed Robinson.
Not satisfied with that setback, he became one of the first defendants in Belize to appeal a conviction all the way at the CCJ.
His appeal was heard last year July in Port of Spain, Trinidad, where his attorney, Eamon Courtenay, and DPP Cheryl-Lynn Vidal appeared before the judges in person to try to convince them why the conviction should or should not be upheld.
Well this evening, after deliberation, the President of the CCJ delivered the court's judgment, in which the dismissed his appeal and upheld the conviction.
After the teleconference hearing, we got a chance to speak with DPP Cheryl-Lynn Vidal about her office's win in all 3 Courts that this case has been heard. Here's what she had to say:
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal, SC - Director of Public Prosecutions
"We are extremely pleased that the court concluded that August conviction was safe. This is the position of course that we had maintained both at the Court of Appeal and at the CCJ. The case against August was always circumstantial. We had no direct evidence. No eyewitnesses that were able to testify that they saw him commit the offence but we were of the view that the circumstantial evidence that we had was sufficient legally to establish the case of course at the supreme court the judge who tried the matter agree with us and our court of appeal also agree with us in the first heating and confirmed the same in the second hearing and now we have it at the CCJ level that legally the evidence was sufficient. One of the issues that was argued in relation to a n accused person who remains into he safety of the dock and makes a statement rather than accused who goes into the box and gives evidence be entitled to a direction on his credibility and we have always felt and we argued strenuously that if an accused person does not go into the stand and open himself up to cross examination as all witnesses do that he should not be entitled to direction speaking about the fact that he has a good character and so he must be telling the truth and the court has confirmed that view and that is a major shift in the law in our jurisdiction. The court of appeal had before touched on the issue in certain judgments but it was never definitively decided when the matter was remitted to the court of appeal. The court of appeal came down on the side e of a direction not necessary and now the CCJ has confirmed that and that is now the law and we are exceedingly pleased with this development. We are also pleased that the CCJ did not see it fit to pronounce at this stage the composition of the parole board, is something that is offensive to the constitution and the court has of course urged that we proceed to promulgate the rules under which the parole board is meant to operate and we will be agitating for government to do that shortly."
So, while there certainly were victories for the DPP and her office, there were certain parts of the case where August made major headway. As we told you, he successfully challenged the mandatory life sentence he got in 2012, and he won: a fixed-date sentence of 30 years in jail has been substituted.
The Press asked The DPP about that:
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal
"We can certainly say haven't been involved in the drafting process, myself along with the draftsman from the attorney general's ministry that it was certainly not the intention of government to remove the death penalty and in the alternative a mandatory term of life imprisonment for person who are convicted of murder. The court has taken a different view of the interpretation to be given to the section, and you will appreciate that we have just been read a summary. I have not have the opportunity to read the entire judgment and to see the reasoning of the court. So yes it is something that immediately concerns me having been involved into a drafting process, but it's something that we would have to take a closer look at but we do have a decision of our highest court saying that now it is possible for a person who is convicted of murder to get a fixed term sentence."
August's co-appelant, Alwin Gabb, was also challenging the life sentence he's been serving in a separate murder conviction. The CCJ has decided that he must go back before a Supreme Court judge where the life imprisonment will be set aside, and a sentence tailored to his case will be substituted after all factors are considered.
Email
Print