City businessman Kevin Jordan was late last evening found guilty of raping a seven-year-old boy.
Jordan, of Lot 524 Republic Park, East Bank Demerara, was found guilty of one of two counts of buggery by a 12-member jury at the High Court.
However, his sentencing was adjourned until October 30, after his attorney requested a probation report.
The first charge alleged that on November 2, 2007, in the county of Demerara, he buggered the child, who was seven years old at the time. He was found not guilty of that charge by a proportion of 10 to 2 jurors.
The second charge, meanwhile, stated that he carried out the act on the same child on November 7, 2007. Jordan, who repeatedly shook his head in disbelief, was found guilty on this count on a proportion of 11 to 1.
Jordan, the owner of Jordan’s Spare Parts at High and Broad streets, had been arrested in 2007 after four boys, between the ages of six and eight years old, alleged that he molested them at his business place. The boys had been students of a nearby primary school.
The trial was heard in-camera.
After the verdicts were delivered, defence attorney Neil Boston requested an adjournment to facilitate the presentation of a probation report.
Counsel’s request prompted Justice Dawn Gregory, who presided over the trial, to enquire the impact a probation report would have on what the jury has already determined and the course of action the court thereafter has to take.
Underscoring the nature of the charge, Justice Gregory said, “I don’t know what a probation report would do. This is not a murder or manslaughter charge.” The judge said it was not a case as if the complainant was a relative of the convict, or was even known to him.
Boston, however, argued that a probation report can provide guidance to the court in its determination of the length of sentence to impose. He advanced that it is possible, through such a report, for the court’s view to change regarding how it decides to sentence.
Counsel argued that his understanding regarding a probation report has no relation to the specific offence, but rather as a factor which the court can consider when sentencing. He added further that the presentation of such a report would only be “fair” to his client.
The case has been adjourned to October 30 at 2 pm for the probation report to be presented, after which the judge will sentence Jordan.
After summing-up the case to the jury for the greater part of the day, Justice Gregory then handed it over to the jury at approximately 6 pm yesterday.
After deliberating for about an hour and fifteen minutes, the jury then returned the verdicts.
Jordan’s relatives, who waited patiently for more than a month for the outcome of the trial, were overcome with grief and moved to tears.
While tears trickled down the cheeks of some, others could be heard sobbing as they expressed shock at the guilty verdict and tried to query the outcome with Boston.
Jordan’s family wept bitterly as they watched him being handcuffed in the prisoner’s dock and escorted out of the courtroom to be taken away to the Camp Street Prison, where he will remain until his sentence is handed down.
Relatives of the boy, meanwhile, appeared somewhat relieved and satisfied with the verdict.
The trial commenced on September 9 and saw six state witnesses taking the stand.
In leading his defence, Jordan called 12 witness.
The state’s case was presented by attorneys Stacy Goodings and Orinthia Schmidt.
