Adidja 'Vybz Kartel' Palmer
.png)
A report from Radio Jamaica's legal analyst Dionne Jackson Miller
By Dionne Jackson Miller
The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in the Vybz Kartel case.
Following final submissions on Tuesday afternoon, the court gave notice that it will deliver its decision by July 31 whether there should be a retrial of Kartel and his co-defendants.
Vybz Kartel, whose real name is Adidja Palmer, and his co-accused, Shawn 'Shawn Storm' Campbell, Kahira Jones and Andre St. John are charged with the 2011 murder of Clive Williams.
One of the issues raised on Tuesday was how the length of time the men have been in custody and any additional time they may spend in custody should be considered in deciding whether there should be a retrial.
The four men were sentenced to life imprisonment in their 2014 trial. But they were sentenced to differing periods before being eligible for parole.
Kahira Jones and Shawn Campbell had been sentenced to 25 years before being eligible for parole; Andre St. John, 30 years; and Adidja Palmer, 35 years before being eligible for parole.
In a retrial, if convicted, the accused person cannot get a heavier sentence than that handed down at the first trial.
So with the men already in custody for 13 years and the possibility of another year or two before a possible retrial, the question was whether the men would be prejudiced by a retrial.
Acting DPP Claudette Thompson argued that given the allegations in the case, if convicted, it would be unlikely that the men would get the minimum of 15 years before parole and that they therefore should not be prejudiced.
She argued that time in custody and the cost of a retrial cannot be weighed too heavily against the other factors as no price can be placed on a life.
She also pointed to cases where judges have said the courts should not be quick to dismiss matters as cases should be determined on their merits and not dismissed because of technical blunders.
Lawyers for their accused also responded on Tuesday. One of the major issues they responded to was the prosecution's allegation that it has a strong case.
The defence said of the 25 exhibits presented in the first trial, the prosecution has only verified the availability of 16, not including two of the most important exhibits, namely the DVDs with the video of the murder and the voice notes.
Attorney John Clarke also said some of the exhibits the defence relied on at trial have not been verified; for example, the signature of the sole eyewitness, Lamar Chow, and a letter to the Public Defender.
The lawyers said the court will have to examine these issues in making a determination as to how strong the prosecution's case is.
Following the six-day hearing, a ruling in the matter is expected by July 31.
comments powered by Disqus
All feeds
