The Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has issued a justification for proceeding with a case where a High Court judge last week said there was no evidence to substantiate a conviction and he was therefore freeing the accused even though he had pleaded guilty to manslaughter.
On June 20, Justice Sandil Kissoon described the incarceration of 22-year-old Marlon Garrett as a travesty and an indictment of the criminal justice system. He lamented that Garrett had spent nearly the last six years on remand awaiting trial for a murder the prosecution had no evidence to prove he committed.
Garrett, who had been originally indicted for murder, threw himself at the mercy of the Court just over a month ago, and pleaded guilty to the lesser offence of manslaughter, which the Judge surmised may well have been a result of the young man’s frustration at being on remand for close to six years.
Following Garrett’s guilty plea, Justice Kissoon had deferred sentencing to first hear from probation and other social impact reports. When the matter was called on June 20 at what should have been the sentencing-hearing, Justice Kissoon informed the court that after reviewing the factual circumstances of the case, he found no evidence implicating the accused for the manslaughter to which he had pleaded or even murder.
The Judge said it was on that basis of “evidential sufficiency” that he was invoking the Court’s supervisory power to enter a not guilty plea on behalf of the accused.
On Tuesday, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Shalimar Ali-Hack SC noted with “grave concern the unfortunate comments” made by the trial judge at the trial.
In a statement, she said that the deceased had died from perforation of the heart which was caused by a stab wound that was one of four incised wounds inflicted on him by the accused.
“The accused Marlon Garrett stated in a caution statement that he did stab the deceased and that he did it because he was attacked by the deceased. The accused alleged that the deceased attacked him with a cutlass. No cutlass was found at the scene but he stated that he armed himself with a knife which he used to attack the deceased. There was evidence that he had a knife. According to the post mortem report the deceased died from perforation of the heart which was caused by a sharp pointed instrument of at least 6 cm in length. The accused admitted that he stabbed the deceased. There was no evidence that he was attacked other than his mere oral statement”, the DPP said.
She added that the evidence in this case raised the issue of self-defence.
“Self-defence is an issue to be decided by the jury. The jury is the judge of the facts of the case. The trial judge is the judge of the law”, Ali-Hack said. She added: “The DPP assures the public that they will continue to uphold the rule of law”.
