THE Guyana Court of Appeal yesterday heard the appeal against the conviction and death sentence of Lloyd  Anthony Mc Leod for the murder of his wife Beverley Anne Mc Leod in April 2005.
The decision was reserved to May 12, when the Court comprising, Acting Chancellor, Mr.Carl Singh, Justice of Appeal Mr. B.S. Roy and additional Judge, Mr. James Bovell-Drakes will decide whether to allow or dismiss the appeal.
In the event of the appeal being allowed, in keeping with the arguments adduced, the conviction and death sentence will be quashed with a substitute verdict of manslaughter or a new trial will be ordered.
Appellant’s counsel, Mr. Hukumchand in association  with Miss Kamini Parag did not argue for a complete acquittal but complained that the trial judge by her misdirection to the jury on the defence of provocation which arose evidently from the alleged caution statements, deprived the Appellant of the benefit of  a manslaughter verdict.
At the conclusion of the arguments by Mr. Hukumchand, the Acting Director of Public Prosecutions, Miss Jo Ann Barlow was not called upon to reply  since her  skeleton arguments conceded that the judge had been lacking on the question of provocation as it related to the accused.
The trial judge in her summing up to the jury had said, “Mr. Foreman and Members of the Jury, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case there are only two verdicts open to you – a verdict of guilty of murder and not guilty of murder.   There is no room for the count of the lesser verdict of Manslaughter”.
According to Hukumchand,” By so directing the Jury, the Judge usurped the function of the Jury and deprived the Appellant of the benefit of the defence of provocation which arose evidentially from the alleged caution statements of the record.’
The counsel had sought to prove to the Appellate Court that the evidence on the caution statements in the case at hand clearly point to acts of provocation  thereby raising a possible conclusion of provocation hence manslaughter ought to have been left for the Jury’s consideration.
The appellant will know his fate on May 12, 2010.