Man jailed 25 years for wounding wife says sentence too harsh - Appeals sentence and conviction

Man jailed 25 years for wounding wife says sentence too harsh – Appeals sentence and conviction

Dec 09, 2018 News

A man who was jailed 25 years over wounding his wife has argued that the sentence imposed on him by Justice Navindra Singh at the High Court in Essequibo, is too severe.
Through his Attorney-at-Law Adrian Thompson, William Johnson has appealed the conviction and sentence.
In 2015, Johnson was handed the custodial sentence after a jury found him guilty of the crime.
On January 20, 2013, in the county of Essequibo, Johnson wounded his wife, Lilawattie Dass, with intent to maim, disable or cause her grievous bodily harm. He was initially indicted for attempted murder; however the jury found him guilty on the lesser offence.
It was reported that in December 2012, Johnson torched the woman’s home then went into hiding. When he emerged, he abducted Dass, who was 32 years of age at the time, and took her in the Queenstown, Essequibo Backlands, where he stabbed her about her body.
According to reports, Dass who had been living with Johnson for about five months was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Dass had told this publication that she had gone outside to use a washroom which is situated on the bottom flat of her stepmother’s home, when Johnson, who was armed with a knife and cutlass, confronted her.
Dass said that she attempted to run away, but Johnson overpowered her and she was forced to accompany him to the Queenstown backlands. Fortunately, police had received a report about the abduction, and ranks from a mobile unit cordoned off the area where she was being held.
It is alleged that the suspect stabbed Dass when he realized that the police were closing in on him.
According to Dass, Johnson cautioned the police not to come close, but the ranks issued a warning to him.
Dass said she then managed to push Johnson aside and run to the ranks. Johnson was then apprehended.
Hearing the appeal last week was Chancellor of the Judiciary (ag) Yonette Cummings-Edwards and Justices of Appeal Rishi Persaud and Dawn Gregory.
Addressing the issue of severity of sentence, Thompson argued that the trial judge failed to asked Johnson or his lawyer if they had anything to say in mitigation after the verdict was announced. Thompson disclosed that his client was sentenced “immediately after.”
It is Thompson’s contention that a lesser sentence could have been imposed if the trial judge had inquired about a plea in mitigation.
“One of the reasons why the sentence is so high is because no mitigation factors were considered,” Thompson submitted. According to the lawyer, the trial judge failed to disclose in his written judgment whether the sentence was imposed based on the kind of weapon (a knife) used during the commissioning of the offence.
Thompson said, “In this case we don’t know whether the judge had a starting point. He (the judge) just had down the sentence like that.” It was put to Thompson by the Chancellor that it is the duty of defence counsel to make a request to mitigate on behalf of his client.
Responding, Thompson submitted that the trial judge should have inquired in that regard. Appearing for the prosecution is Senior State Counsel Mercedes Glasford. The case was adjourned until January 20, 2019 for continuation.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News