Rape convicts appeal “excessive” sentences

Dec 25, 2018 News

An appeal has been filed on behalf of 43-year-old Sean Trotman, the father of three who was convicted and sentence to 45 years’ imprisonment for raping an underage girl. In September 2015, Trotman went on trial for two counts of rape, which occurred sometime in January 2013 and March 2014 respectively.
The trial was heard by now Chief Justice (ag) Roxanne George who sentenced Trotman to 20 and 25 years on each of the counts respectively. This was after a 12-member mixed jury returned a 10-2 guilty verdict in relation to the first count and a unanimous guilty verdict in relation to the second count.
The judge ordered that the sentences be served consecutively.

Linton Pompey

In his appeal against the convictions and sentences, Trotman has argued that the sentence imposed by the trial judge is “excessive.” The convict further argues that the trial judge erred in law in admitting prejudicial evidence during the trial, and further, that the judge’s ruling is against the weight of the evidence.
Following the announcement of the verdict, the judge asked Trotman, if he had anything to say. He said, “Yuh worship, I don’t know anything about this case.” He then sought to clarify that he does not know anything about the allegation, claiming that he would never do such a thing.
Trotman had told the court that the victim’s mother had concocted the story and put her up to it. Before passing sentence, Justice George had stressed the seriousness and prevalence of the offence.
The Judge then had noted that Trotman abused his position of trust and that cases like these would leave the victims with many issues to cope with.
Also appealing his rape conviction and sentence is 53-year-old father of 12, Linton Pompey, who was jailed 37 years.
In September 2015, High Court Judge Jo Ann Barlow imposed the custodial sentence on Pompey after a jury found him guilty of various sexual offences including two counts of rape of a minor and sexual activity with a minor. The incidents occurred between May 1 and May 31, 2011, on January 10, 2012 and between June 1 and June 30, 2013.
Dissatisfied with the outcome of the matters, Pompey through his Attorney-at-law Nigel Hughes filed an appeal asking the Court of Appeal to reverse, set aside and/or discharge the decision of the High Court.
Hughes is contending that trial Judge Barlow failed to sufficiently put his client’s defence to the jury. The lawyer further contends that the trial judge did not adequately direct the jury on how to deal with the innumerable inconsistencies and discrepancies in the prosecution’s case.
Added to that, Hughes is arguing that the trial judge failed to sufficiently direct the jury on the failure of the prosecution’s witnesses to produce vital recorded evidence, and what weight to attach to the evidence given by the witnesses.
It is the lawyer’s contention that the decision of the jury is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence adduced by the prosecution. The appeal will be heard on January 16, 2019 before Chancellor of the Judiciary Yonette Cummings-Edwards and Justices of Appeal Dawn Gregory and Rishi Persaud.
Before handing down sentence on Pompey, Justice Barlow had told the convict that in committing the acts, he breached his position of trust. The Judge also noted to Pompey that society expects better from its elders.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News