Asif Hamid, who earlier in the month pleaded guilty to killing Henry Lallman who was found in a shallow grave back in August, 2015, was yesterday sentenced to fifteen years in prison.
Hamid, 27, a butcher of Lot 34 Kingston, Corriverton, was sen-tenced by Justice Simone Morris-Ramlall at the High Court in Berbice. The state was repre-sented by prosecutor, attorney-at-law, Tuanna Hardy, while the accused was represented by attorney-at-law, Mursaline Bacchus.
Hamid was charged with the murder of Lallman, 76, of Number 55 Village, Corentyne, in August, 2015.
Lallman had disappeared and police were able to locate the man’s partially decomposed body after they were informed that he had gone to Hamid’s home and never returned. The man’s body was discovered in a shallow grave dug under a mango tree in Hamid’s yard.
A post-mortem examination performed by Dr Vivekanand Brijmohan gave the cause of death as strangulation.
Lallman had gone to the butcher’s home to collect money owed to him from the sale of cattle. However, there was a misunderstanding and the sus-pect had told investigators that he strangled the pensioner.
In a probation report which was read before sentencing yesterday, the court heard that according to the prison reports, Hamid was not known to be involved in conflicts with other inmates but there were occasions that he failed to adhere to the prison rules.
Some of his family members shared that he was pleasant while others disclosed that he was reserved and involved in gambling, but they all were shocked at the offence.
Hamid told the probation officer that Lallman was his father’s business partner and he did not know him well other than seeing him around. However, relatives of the deceased noted that Lallman and Hamid shared a friendship and that they spoke over the phone and Lallman would frequent Hamid’s home.
Brianna Lallman, grand-daughter of the deceased, told the court via Zoom that when he went missing they started to assume the worst, which was confirmed after his body was found. She added that the last image she remembers of her grandfather is of a cloth being placed over his head at the funeral because the body could not be viewed due to its decomposed state.
Hardy then asked the grand-daughter how she felt that the accused pleaded guilty to the crime. The woman responded by saying she has mixed feelings where that is concerned because although he is taking respon-sibility for his actions, he cannot bring back her grandfather. “This was the worst possible thing that could have happened in that situation. The worst possible outcome,” she stressed.
She then asked the court to hand down an appropriate sentence to the accused.
Attorney Bacchus in a plea of mitigation, said that Hamid was 22 years old when the offence was committed and he asked that the judge bear that factor in mind.
He pointed out that the post-mortem report indicated that the deceased died from manual strangulation, alluding to the fact that no weapon was used in carrying out the crime.
Prosecutor Hardy argued that while Hamid was a youth he took advantage of an elderly and vulnerable person.
She said Lallman shared a relationship and bond of trust with the accused, where the accused was allowed to sell cows and then pay him the money.
But she noted that the probation report highlighted that the accused had a gambling problem, and it was that gambling problem which led him to take the life of Lallman. “Because he gambled out some money that was meant to be paid to the deceased, money owed to the deceased, and he took advantage of the trust showed by the deceased by luring him into his yard and killing him and burying him in the said yard.”
She continued that Hamid had no regard for human life by leaving the body right in his yard and while the state notes his remorse in the probation report, a sentence must be given which would deter others from taking advantage of the vulnerable in society and to also deter persons from that “bad habit of gambling.”
Before issuing the sentence, Justice Morris-Ramlall stated that she took into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, the manner in which the crime was committed, that the crime involved the taking the life of an elderly and vulnerable person with whom the accused had a good relationship, the fact that the deceased trusted the accused to the extent that he regularly extended credit to him, as the caution statement given by the accused revealed.
She noted that Lallman trusted the accused enough to go alone to his premises to retrieve money owed to him. “That trust was betrayed when the accused strangled the deceased, snuffing out his life,” the judge said.
She then added that while the accused’s attorney submitted that the court should take into account the fact that no weapon was used, “… that is noted but one also should appreciate that the hands in this case were just as effective as any other weapon. They were effective in achieving the deliberate purpose of the accused.”
According to the judge, she also considered the fact that Hamid took the life of an “elderly friend” just over “a few dollars.”
Justice Morris-Ramlall added that she also took into account that the accused seemed to have placed no value on the deceased’s life or dignity based on the manner in which he disposed of Lallman’s body by placing him in a shallow grave.
She also considered the victim impact statement which was made by the granddaughter of the deceased, which highlighted the effects the demise of the deceased has had on his family.
Additionally, the judge noted that the probation report said the deceased was a philanthropist in his community.
The judge also considered the plea and mitigation made by attorney Bacchus, but she said she also studied the probation report and detected no remorse from the accused for his actions, but instead, just a statement about him being traumatised.
The judge then started the term of imprisonment at 30 years but added that she is required to take into account the fact that the accused placed himself at the mercy of the court by accepting responsibility for his action when he entered a guilty plea, and as such, she deducted 10 years and an additional 5 years for time spent on remand.
“I have found no other mitigating circumstance. The accused is therefore sentenced to serve a term of imprisonment of 15 years. That is the sentence of the court,” Justice Morris-Ramlall said yesterday.
