THE 12-member jury was unable to reach a verdict in the Steve Alert carnal knowledge case, at the Berbice Assizes last Friday.

Justice James Bovell-Drakes ordered a retrial after the forewoman reported that the panel, comprising three women and nine men, were 7 to 5 in favour of the prosecution.
Prior to the report, the accused, who had been on bail, became agitated on seeing a prison officer who was summoned in the event of a conviction and shed some tears.
The jurors, who had requested further direction from the judge shortly after 16:00 hrs, returned 15 minutes later and indicated that their decision was still the same.
Apart from the members of media, the only other person in the courtroom was the mother of the virtual complainant.
After being told, by the judge, of the jury’s decision, Alert was seemingly dumfounded and had to be repeatedly informed that he was free until the next sitting of the Berbice Assizes.
Earlier, Justice Bovell-Drakes delivered a three-hour summation on the evidence, highlighting Section 70 of the Criminal Law Offences Act, Chapter 8:01, as amended by the November 2005 Act, which, categorically, states that it is unlawful for any man or person to have sexual intercourse with a girl under age of 15 years.
“However, you must not have sympathy for the victim or the accused, as sympathy does not play a part in law. There must be evidence. The law does not require him to have complete sexual gratification. As judges of the facts, you alone can determine the accuracy of the witnesses.”
Referring to the terminology of carnal knowledge as an old English expression for having unlawful sex, the judge said the accused is alleged to have had his erect penis placed into the vagina of an under-age girl.
The judge, while questioning whether a fourteen-year-old could, safely, use the words ‘hard and stiff’, added that the caution statement refers to the accused saying that on March 2, 2009, he was home alone with ‘Shorty’ and she made advances to me.

Difficulties
However, the judge highlighted the difficulties he encountered in deciphering the handwriting of a Dr. Persaud, who was then attached to Skeldon Hospital and had emphasised that it was the State’s responsibility to have the document clarified, so as not to create doubts.
The statement of the accused records him as saying: “Officer, yesterday, March 2, 2009, me and Shorty was alone at home and she made advances to me. She laid on the bed and pulled me upon her. I felt nice. I placed my penis into her vagina and she started to cry and I stopped. She got up and went outside and reported to her Aunt Alexis, who, in company with others, came and quarreled and thereafter took me to the police station with Shorty. I am sorry for what happened”.
The judge told the jury: “If you believe he did it, he took his own risk and the ignorance of the law is no excuse.”
Nevertheless, Justice Bovell-Drakes urged the jurors to consider the defence, in which the accused is recorded as saying: “I do not know about the incident. I did not have sex with the girl. I told Corporal Frank I do not know anything.”
“He was sufficiently mature not to go further, whether he felt nice or not with a 14-year-old girl,” the judge said.
In her opening address, State Prosecutor Rhondel Weaver had told the jury that the elements of the offence are that it was the accused who had sexual intercourse with the teenager and the latter was under 15 years old.
She cautioned the jury to consider some key terms, in that this is an offence of carnal knowledge and not rape and, as such, consent was irrelevant.
Additionally, the state’s case is that the complainant was 14 years old and, under the law, she was incapable of giving consent to sexual intercourse.
Weaver noted that it was immaterial for the accused to know or not that the alleged victim was under 15 years old when he had sexual intercourse with her on March 2, 2009, at Number 35 Village, Corentyne, Berbice.