Latest update February 16th, 2025 4:46 PM
Latest News
- Oil in Liza 1, 2 and Payara to be drained in less than five years
- ExxonM does not deny paying taxes in Bahamas but tells K/News to focus on how the oil deal is delivering money to Guyana
- Thousands take part in London rally against Donald Trump’s Gaza plan
- Govt. aggressively pursuing digitizing of health sector – Pres. Ali
- 275 cases of child abuse recorded in 2025 – Min. Persaud
Appeal Court to hear case of man convicted for murder of Mahaica farmer
Convicted: Dhupaul Singh.
Kaieteur News – Four years after he was sentenced to life in prison, convicted murderer, Dhupaul Singh, is set to have an appeal of his sentence and conviction heard.
At 10:00 am today, Judges of the Appeal Court in Kingston, Georgetown, are set to hear a rehash of the series of events which led a mixed 12-member jury to unanimously find Singh, called ‘Tailor Man’ guilty of the September 2014 chopping to death of Mahaica farmer, Balkissoon.
The incident which occurred at Helena Number Two, Mahaica, reportedly stemmed from an argument between the two men following insults which were hurled by Singh about the dead farmer’s wife.
Singh had nonetheless maintained that he was innocent of any crime even to the end of his trial in the High Court citing issues of provocation and self-defence; issues he claimed that trial Judge Jo Ann Barlow failed to put to the jury for the consideration of a verdict in his case. Instead, Justice Barlow imposed the life sentence on Singh, ordering that he was only to be considered eligible for parole after serving at least 25 years.
Dead: Mahaica farmer, Balkissoon.
As such, Singh listed in the grounds of his appeal issues of severity of sentence and provocation as grounds in which the trial judge had erred in the direction given to the jury.
Through his lawyer, Mark Conway, the appellant contended that the judge erred by not putting the facts or evidence that may have borne a finding of manslaughter by reason of provocation to the jury.
He noted that the jury was not alerted by the judge of the facts or evidence that they may consider provocation as a deciding factor.
Conway contended further that the judge’s summation failed to reflect an adequate summary and analysis of the facts of his case.
According to the lawyer, this should have been presented to the jury for its deliberation as to whether the appellant was provoked by the deceased; even as he advanced that this failure is a material omission which may have deprived the appellant of a verdict of guilty of manslaughter by reason of provocation.
Reasoning on the issue of severity of sentence, the lawyer argued on behalf of his client that the sentence imposed does not reflect guidelines or principles laid down in case law.
He noted that the judge should have stated that full credit be given for any time spent on remand.
As a result, Conway argued that a sentence was rendered which was unjustified and manifestly excessive.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
I don’t remember!
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- I have an uncle, Morty Finkelstein, who has the peculiar habit of remembering things with... more
OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus
Antiguan Barbudan Ambassador to the United States, Sir Ronald Sanders By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The upcoming election... more
Weekend Cartoon
