Appeal Court Judges Mark Mohammed, Ricky Rahim and Maria Wilson are set to deliver a historic judgment that will set the guidelines on re-sentencing murder convicts.
On Thursday, the judges heard submissions on the first appeal in re-sentencing murder cases.
In 2023, High Court Judge Gail Gonzales sentenced Farayad Edoo and Rawle Ghanny to 40 years each in prison for the murder of Rajpaul Dass.
At the time, the men had already served over 25 years in prison after being convicted in 1999 for Dass’ murder, which occurred in 1994.
Their mandatory death penalty was commuted to life imprisonment based on the landmark Privy Council ruling in the Jamaican case of Pratt and Morgan, which permits executions only within five years after conviction when all appeals have been exhausted.
Dass’ wife Parbatee, who hired the men to “get rid of” her husband, was also convicted in 1999 and had her death sentence commuted. She was eventually freed in 2023 when her life sentence was reduced to 30 years, and her time spent in prison from arrest to then was calculated at 28 years.
Since the Privy Council ruling, all death row inmates with over five years’ time were mandated to be re-sentenced to life in prison. However, it was later argued that life imprisonment without a date of release was unjust, and each prisoner needed to be re-sentenced to a term.
Dass and the two men had their hearing in 2023.
The men were both sentenced to 40 years, which they are now appealing.
The Appeal Judge’s decision is expected to impact sentence guidelines for all re-sentenced murder convictions.
The men, who were represented by Peter Clarke, are challenging the minimum sentence of 40 years imposed by Gonzales, saying it should have been less. Clarke added that their constitutional rights were infringed after spending nine years on death row before the death sentence was commuted to life in prison in 2008.
The judges sought to get a range from Clarke and Special State Prosecutor Wayne Rajbansie for murder that both sides agreed on. Rajbansie said in some jurisdictions, the range is from 30 to 60 years, while Clarke said a starting point in some countries was 25 years. Neither is committed to offering a range based solely on the fact that each murder needs to be tried on its own merit.
In 2023, High Court Judge Lisa Ramsumair-Hinds called for a “tiered approach” for murder that carries the mandatory death penalty, unlike felony murder, which makes the death penalty discretionary.
Felony murder is categorised as a violent arrestable offence and applies when an offender commits a certain kind of felony and someone is killed in the course of it. It does not carry the automatic death sentence reserved for murder convictions.
Both Clarke and Rajbansie submitted that the decision is ultimately up to the trial judge, but submitted that the classification of murder is needed to better set an acceptable range.
The judges questioned what method should be used to arrive at an acceptable range. However, neither attorney could offer a solution. The judges’ decision will impact all future re-sentencing hearings and appeals for those who feel their re-sentencing was unjust.
A similar case is scheduled for Monday involving convicted murderer Peter Matthews.
He was 17 at the time of the 1978 rape and murder of four-year-old Roslyn Lucas and sentenced to death in 1984. His re-sentence saw him imprisoned for 50 years, setting him free in 2034, from the date of conviction and 2028 from the time of his arrest.
His appeal hinges on the argument that the judge erred by applying Bahamian sentencing guidelines of 30 to 60 years for heinous murders instead of following local precedents, where re-sentenced child offenders received starting points of 25 to 35 years.
His attorneys are also arguing the case should be treated under the felony murder rule, since the evidence suggested that Lucas’ death was an unintended consequence of his sexual assault of the child, as was adduced by the pathologist during his trial.
