A HIGH Court jury in the Neesa Gopaul murder trial delivered a unanimous guilty verdict yesterday to the mother of the teen, Bibi Shareema Gopaul, and her ex-lover, Jarvis ‘Barry’ Small, after an approximate three-hour consultation among the 12-member panel.Bibi Shareema Gopaul was sentenced to 106 years, and Barry Small to 96 years by Justice Navindra Singh.

The much-anticipated ruling led to the sentencing of the two accused, dubbed as “cold-blooded killers” during the trial, five years after the brutal murder of the 16-year-old Queen’s College student.

Gopaul’s decomposed and seemingly ‘headless’ body was found stuffed in a suitcase in a creek along the Linden-Soesdyke Highway on October 2, 2010. The suitcase was anchored in a creek at the Emerald Tower Resort with several dumbbells.

Small was sentenced to 60 years for the offence of murder, with 10 years added for premeditation; another 10 years for brutality; an additional 10 years because the victim was a child; and finally another six years for domestic violence.
Gopaul was also sentenced to 60 years for the capital offence; 10 years for premeditation; 10 years because it was a child; 10 years for brutality; another 10 years because it is her daughter and she did not protect her; and six years for domestic violence.
LOUD GASP
As the judge announced the sentence there was a loud gasp from the spectators, followed by frenzied chatter until the police called for silence.

The judge told Gopaul that while she may not live to serve the time, he hoped that wherever she goes she may live it out.
Small was represented by a team of Attorneys-at-Law, comprising Glen Hanoman, Bernard De Santos SC, Lyndon Amsterdam and Zanna Frank, while Gopaul was represented by Attorney-at-Law George Thomas.
The case was presented by State Prosecutors Diana Kaulesar, Mercedes Thompson and Stacy Gooding.
Both convicts were asked if they had anything to say as to why the sentence should not be passed.
Small responded quickly, “Yes, I did not have a fair trial in this court.” He added that prejudicial evidence was entered in the case, and the judgment was for political purpose. Small said there was no evidence to convict him or anyone of this murder, and that the judge was being unfair because he is a politician by nature.
State Prosecutor Kaulesar responded that the evidence in the case speaks for itself and the jury had made their decision.
Before sentencing, Small charged that Justice Singh’s ruling was politically motivated but the judge stated emphatically, “I don’t have any political ambitions.”

PROBATION REPORT REQUEST

One of Small’s lawyers, Mr. Glenn Hanoman, requested a probation report before sentencing. He told the Court that his client is a 30-year-old married man with two children.

Bibi Gopaul was also asked if she had anything to say, and she also responded in the affirmative.
She said, “Sir, when I was locked up, the reporters (were) putting things in the paper. They spoke a lot of ill things.” Gopaul added that she was never interviewed, and claimed that the jury could have done more in her favour.
According to Gopaul, the case lacked evidence. She said: “I know a lot more about the case; there is a lot more to that. I thought I would have justice here.”
On that note, Justice Singh responded, “You did.”
Gopaul’s defence counsel said it was the first conflict with the law for his 42-year-old client, and that she was in the process of rehabilitation. Meanwhile, the defence counsel gave an oral notice of appeal in the matter.

NO REMORSE
However, neither of the convicts was seen to show remorse when the sentence was handed down.
And neither Small nor Gopaul was seen to cry openly when the verdict and sentence were passed. While walking out of the courtroom, however, Small seemed a bit teary-eyed.
The two, on leaving the courtroom, took separate exit routes, and were escorted to their respective court lockups.
Relatives of both convicts were present in the courtroom, and Small’s wife, Marcelline Basdeo-Small, was seen crying outside of the courtroom.

SUSPENSE
Yesterday, the atmosphere in the High Court was tangibly charged with suspense, as relatives of the two convicts and members of the general public awaited the highly-anticipated verdict in the murder trial of the teen.
As the courtroom was opened, persons rushed through the corridors into the courtroom fighting their way to a seat. More benches were brought into the courtroom to accommodate the additional influx of persons eager to hear the verdict.

The corridor outside the courtroom was swarming with even more persons. In addition, other lawyers who were not part of the defence and prosecution positioned themselves to hear the decision. Some lawyers who could not manage to get a seat were standing in the corner along with police and High Court staffers, some of whom were seen fetching their chairs to the courtroom to hear the verdict for themselves.
There was a lot of chit-chat as everyone waited in anticipation for the arrival of the jurors to give their decisions.
Before the members of the jury set out to make their decision, the summation was done in the morning session by the judge.
Based on the evidence provided by the prosecution and the defence, the case was summed-up and the jury was advised by the judge in keeping with the law.
He advised the jury to consider all the evidence in the matter and not to speculate. Justice Singh added that the State had to prove all the elements of the charge.

GRUESOME DISCOVERY
On October 2, 2010, the headless remains of Neesa was discovered at a location along the Soesdyke Linden Highway, tucked inside a suitcase that was partially submerged in a creek. A rope was wrapped around the suitcase and dumbbells were attached at one end, apparently in an effort to keep the body under water.
In addition to the body, a passport bearing the name Neesa Lalita Gopaul was also found. The teenager was reported missing just days before the gruesome discovery was made.
Subsequent to the discovery of the body, Bibi Gopaul and her ex-paramour, Small, were arrested and charged for the murder. People who had gathered outside of the court loudly expressed their satisfaction with the verdict that was handed down.