Defence lawyer in murder trial: His wife provoked him

A 12-member jury in the Port-of-Spain High Court was asked yesterday to convict a 49-year-old man who admitted to chopping his wife to death in a fit of rage. The man, Vishwanath Sharma, is before a jury and Justice Hayden St Clair-Douglas charged with the murder of his common-law wife, Georgina Sookoo, who was killed outside her Sangre Grande home on October 24, 2003. While addressing the jury at the end of Sharma’s trial his lawyer, Daniel Khan, said: “I submit to you that a verdict of not guilty to murder but guilty of manslaughter is not letting off the accused. “He must be found guilty of something and he will be punished and sentenced in accordance with the judicial principles of sentencing.”  In addressing the jury, Khan said they should consider provocation as a reason for finding Sharma guilty of manslaughter rather than murder.

 

“I can assure you (the jury) that one verdict or the other will result in the accused being punished for what he has done. The maximum sentenced for manslaughter is life imprisonment,” Khan noted. 

Sharma, while testifying in his defence during the trial, told the court on the night of Sookoo’s murder, they were arguing about her alleged infidelity during their relationship. Sharma also claimed to have been a victim of attacks from Sookoo in the past when he confronted her about her alleged adultery but maintained throughout cross-examination that he had loved Sookoo. Sharma claimed to have been hit in the head with an heating iron, chopped and stabbed by Sookoo during heated arguments. However, while under cross-examination from State prosecutor Jennifer Martin, Sharma could not provide any medical evidence pertaining to the alleged acts of violence.

 

“Sharma has no justification for killing Sookoo. His culpability is to some extent mitigated because he would not otherwise have killed her unless provoked,” Khan said. Khan later explained to jurors the elements of the defence of provocation as decided in several Privy Counsel cases. Khan described the case to the jurors as “love gone wrong,” saying his client did not make a “healthy and mature choice” to walk away from the turbulent relationship. Khan claimed Sharma was tormented by the words of Sookoo during their arguments, noting that Sharma was teased by Sookoo about his sexual inadequacies. The matter was adjourned to next Monday.