‘Bumpy’ gets 56 years for killing neighbour

Apr 04, 2014 News

---

 

By Latoya Giles
Murder accused Renwick Alexander called ‘Bumpy’ was yesterday found guilty and sentenced to 56 years for killing his neighbour.
Alexander, 61, of Lot 34 John Street, Lodge, was on trial before Justice Singh and a mixed jury, since Tuesday, when the April session of the Demerara Criminal Assizes commenced, for the murder of 55-year-old Carl Thomas called ‘Dog’. The incident occurred on 3rd November, 2010, at the said address.
Senior State Counsel Judith Gildharie-Mursalin called seven witnesses to testify on behalf of the Prosecution, after which Alexander gave an unsworn statement from the dock in his defence. He was represented by Attorney-at-law, Hukumchand Parag.
The Prosecution’s star witness was the brother of the deceased, Lear Porter, a grocery shop owner, also of John Street, Lodge, who testified that he and Alexander were friends since he was about 9-10 years old and during that 47-year friendship they never had any problems.
He said Alexander lived in his home for years and on the day in question, Alexander was riding his (Porter’s) bicycle. Porter testified that he was in his grocery shop at about 6:00pm when he recognized Alexander’s voice, as he and Thomas were arguing. He said they were calling each other ‘cross’ and ‘who should get a life’ among other things. Porter said it was when his brother was entering his yard through the gate from the road that Alexander pulled a knife from his waist and stabbed his brother.
Porter said that Thomas then entered the shop and told him that his “belly” was “coming out”. Porter said he observed that his brother’s intestines were protruding and even the tennis roll he had just eaten was coming out from the wound. Thomas was rushed to the Georgetown Hospital where he died later that evening.
The court heard that sometime after 9:00pm that said night, Alexander was arrested at his home by Constable Dion Prince. He was examined but no marks of violence were seen on his body.
At the East La Penitence Police Station, Woman Police Sergeant Lillian Scotland put the allegation to Alexander and cautioned him, and he replied saying, “Carl Thomas, who I know as ‘Dog’ is a junkie and he always disrespecting me and tonight he run up in me face with a knife and I tek the knife from he and jook he. Me nah even know wha happen wid de knife after. I go home and the police come and hold me and bring me here, but me nah a give nothing in writing and me ain’t signing nothing till I talk to my lawyer.”
Sergeant Scotland observed that the multi-coloured jersey which Alexander was wearing had what appeared to be blood spots on the hem at the front. She asked Alexander for the jersey and he gave it to her. This jersey, which was admitted as an exhibit, was examined by Superintendent Stephen Greaves, who was deemed an expert in the analysis and identification of human blood, and who verified that it was human blood on same.
Constable Maxwell Grant of CID Headquarters’ Photographic Branch also testified and through him some 14 photographs and negatives were admitted into evidence, depicting the scene of the stabbing as well as the body of the deceased.
Constable Shawndell Semple Dowden testified that she identified the body of Carl Thomas to Dr. Nehaul Singh on November 8, 2010, at the GPHC Mortuary. Government Forensic Pathologist Dr. Singh told the jury that Carl Thomas had sustained a stab wound from which his small intestines were protruding and he gave the cause of death as haemorrhage and shock due to stab wound.
In summing up the evidence for the Jury, Justice Singh told them that if they believed the oral statement Alexander gave to Sergeant Scotland then they had to consider provocation and that would reduce murder to manslaughter, if they so found.
He, however, told them that they had to first be satisfied that the elements of murder were established by the prosecution before they could go on to consider whether Carl Thomas said or did something to cause Alexander to have a sudden and temporary loss of self-control. They had to consider further whether a reasonable man, in that same situation, would have reacted as Alexander did. A reasonable man having the same age and attributes as Alexander. The jury had to first find him not guilty of murder before they could find him guilty of manslaughter.
After deliberating for some three hours, the jury returned a unanimous verdict of guilty of the offence of Murder.
Alexander told the Judge that he was innocent of murder, maintaining that he and Thomas had a scuffle during which Thomas was stabbed. He begged the Judge to be lenient with him.
Justice Singh told Alexander that his starting point for murder was 60 years and he would deduct the four years for time served in prison, but he did not find the case had any mitigating factors to make any further deductions. He then imposed the 56-year-sentence.

---

---