JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, July 25, 2025

Sean Luke trial proceeds as no case submission overruled

by

Derek Achong
1494 days ago
20210622

A High Court Judge has re­ject­ed a move to have one of two men, ac­cused of mur­der­ing six-year-old Sean Luke as teenagers, freed due to in­suf­fi­cient ev­i­dence against him.

De­liv­er­ing an oral rul­ing dur­ing a vir­tu­al hear­ing, yes­ter­day, Jus­tice Lisa Ram­sumair-Hinds over­ruled a no-case sub­mis­sion brought by at­tor­neys rep­re­sent­ing Akeel Mitchell. Af­ter de­liv­er­ing her de­ci­sion, Mitchell’s at­tor­ney Ran­dall Raphael was called up­on to in­di­cate whether his client would tes­ti­fy in his de­fence or call de­fence wit­ness­es.

Raphael re­it­er­at­ed that his client elect­ed to re­main silent but said that he would call pathol­o­gist Pro­fes­sor Hu­bert Dais­ley, who per­formed a sec­ond au­top­sy on Luke’s body, as a wit­ness.

While State pathol­o­gist Dr Es­lyn Mc­Don­ad-Bur­ris ruled that Luke died of in­ter­nal in­juries from be­ing sodom­ized with a sug­ar­cane stalk, Dais­ley al­leged­ly ruled that he died of stran­gu­la­tion and that the in­ter­nal in­juries oc­curred af­ter death.

Mitchell’s co-ac­cused Richard Cha­too in­di­cat­ed that he would take the wit­ness stand to tes­ti­fy in his de­fence and would not call any wit­ness­es.

In the no-case sub­mis­sion, Mitchell’s lead at­tor­ney Mario Mer­ritt claimed that all the ev­i­dence pre­sent­ed by pros­e­cu­tors since the judge-alone tri­al be­gan in ear­ly April was mere­ly cir­cum­stan­tial and spec­u­la­tive. He not­ed that pros­e­cu­tors were re­ly­ing on the ev­i­dence of two teenagers from Luke’s com­mu­ni­ty, who claimed that they saw Mitchell, his co-ac­cused Richard Cha­too and Luke di­vert in­to an aban­doned sug­ar­cane field, which bounds their com­mu­ni­ty, while they were all go­ing fish­ing.

Mer­ritt not­ed that there was no di­rect ev­i­dence of what tran­spired in the sug­ar­cane field up un­til Luke’s de­com­pos­ing body was found there, two days lat­er. He al­so re­it­er­at­ed that there were nu­mer­ous in­con­sis­ten­cies in the duo’s ev­i­dence with both ad­mit­ting that they ini­tial­ly lied to po­lice when ques­tioned over Luke’s dis­ap­pear­ance. While Mer­ritt ac­cept­ed that Mitchell’s DNA was linked to se­men found on Luke’s un­der­wear, he not­ed that he was not linked to DNA pro­files found on anal swabs tak­en dur­ing Luke’s au­top­sy and on the sug­ar­cane stalk that was used to sodom­ize him.

In her de­ci­sion, Jus­tice Ram­sumair-Hinds dis­agreed with Mer­ritt over whether the cir­cum­stan­tial ev­i­dence was enough to pos­si­bly ar­rive at a guilty ver­dict for Mitchell.

She al­so re­ject­ed Mer­ritt’s claim that the State had to prove that Mitchell and Cha­too, who are ac­cused of joint en­ter­prise, con­spired to­geth­er to mur­der Luke. She agreed with pros­e­cu­tors that they did not have to prove who was the prin­ci­pal or ac­ces­so­ry in the crime as there was ev­i­dence of one be­ing en­cour­aged or as­sist­ed by the oth­er. Last­ly, Jus­tice Ram­sumair-Hinds had to con­sid­er a le­gal prin­ci­ple, which states that chil­dren be­tween the ages of sev­en and 14 are pre­sumed to not be ca­pa­ble of fac­ing crim­i­nal charges un­less it could be proven that they knew their ac­tions were se­ri­ous­ly wrong. Jus­tice Ram­sumair-Hinds not­ed that while pros­e­cu­tors had to prove the men­tal ca­pac­i­ty of the ac­cused, the lev­el of proof re­quired to re­but the pre­sump­tion was less as Mitchell was a few weeks short of his four­teenth birth­day when Luke was killed.

She not­ed that the ev­i­dence of pre­med­i­ta­tion and of al­leged at­tempts to con­ceal Luke’s body al­so re­butted the prin­ci­ple in Mitchell’s case.

The no-case sub­mis­sion was the lat­est pro­ce­dur­al ap­pli­ca­tion brought by Mitchell’s at­tor­neys in an ef­fort to have him freed.

Be­fore the start of the tri­al, Jus­tice Ram­sumair-Hinds dis­missed two sim­i­lar ap­pli­ca­tions, one over in­suf­fi­cient ev­i­dence and an­oth­er over a for­mer pros­e­cu­tor in the case briefly rep­re­sent­ing him be­fore she joined the Of­fice of the Di­rec­tor of Pub­lic Pros­e­cu­tions (DPP).

Luke went miss­ing on the evening of March 26, 2006 and his body was found two days lat­er in an aban­doned sug­ar­cane field next to his com­mu­ni­ty.

Dais­ley is ex­pect­ed to tes­ti­fy when the tri­al re­sumes to­mor­row, with Cha­too sched­uled to take the wit­ness stand on Fri­day.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored