Killers appeal conviction and sentence

May 04, 2014 News

Attorney at law Murseline Bacchus has filed a motion of appeal in the High Court following the conviction and sentence of two clients on the counts of murder.
The two men, Joshua Persaud, called ‘Sunny Boy’ and ‘Bun Boy’, 25, of Bloomfield and Raphael Rene Morrison, called “Red Head”, 24, of Auchlyne Estate, Corentyne, Berbice, were convicted before Justice Diana Insanally and a mixed jury for the murder of Marlon Andrew Ramcharran on June 3, last year.
They were subsequently found guilty and sentenced to 20 years each in jail.
State Prosecutor Renita Singh in presenting the state case had stated that on the day in question Ramcharran was at a bar in the village where he met two friends, Nicholas Beharry and Rakesh Jaikarran.
They subsequently went to a disco during which time they met the two accused. Some time during the night there was an altercation between the accused and some other guys and the accused and Ramcharran.
The friends subsequently left the bar and Marlon went ahead and his two friends followed behind. The friends consequently heard Marlon pleading ‘you chopping the wrong person’.
Beharry and Rakesh then ran to where Marlon was shouting and there they saw the two accused chopping him. Marlon was later found lying on the ground in a pool of blood.
During the trial the Prosecution called a number of witnesses including Detective Assistant Superintendent of Police Gary Mc Allister, Detective Constables Emmanuel Rajnauth and Andel Doris, Police Constable Nkofi Austin and Dr. Nehaul Singh who performed the Post Mortem examination which had revealed that the cause of death was due to shock and hemorrhage due to multiple incised wounds.
The court had also visited the scene of the crime at Tain. Magistrate Fabio Azore and Detective Corporal Primus Sam were also called to testify.During the trial both star witnesses (eye witnesses) Nicolas Beharry and Rakesh Jaikarran had given evidence-in-chief.
Attorney at Law Bacchus is appealing on a number of grounds including –the learned trial judge erred in law by not upholding the “no-case” submission put forward by Counsel and not directing an acquittal.
He is also arguing that admissible evidence was wrongfully ruled by the learnt trial judge to be inadmissible.
Counsel is contending that the learned judge erred in ruling that two of the witnesses for the prosecution could not be contradicted by their previous inconsistent statements.
The law on inconsistency and contradictions was not properly put to the jury nor was the law on visual identification.
The defence of the appellant was not adequately put to the jury he argued and the sentence was unduly severe.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News