But, the Judge observing that he (the accused) did not show mercy to his aunt, imposed a sentence of 14 years, pointing out that he had 22 years in mind, but had deducted 8 years for incarceration and the plea of guilty that was given.
Judge Singh noted that every day one opens the newspaper somebody is murdered for nonsense because of the wanton disregard for human lives in this society.
People must know that just as they show their victims no mercy, this court will have no mercy for them as far as sentences are concerned.
At first, the convict told the police that the crime was committed by two thieves who had threatened to rob his aunt and declared that Andrew Spencer was his accomplice.
But during the investigations, he gave a caution statement, incriminating himself in his aunt’s death. His alleged accomplice, Spencer, has not been charged as there is no evidence to link him to the crime, except the words of the prisoner.
Government Pathologist Dr. Nehaul Singh found evidence of blunt trauma to the deceased’s head as well as compression injuries to the neck and the cause of death was given as asphyxiation due to manual strangulation.
In a lengthy caution statement, the convict had also told the police that, on February 7, 2007, his aunt had gone to the bank and had withdrawn a sum of $100,000.
Emergencies
She gave one Golding a sum of $50,000 for emergencies and then went for ‘Andy’ (correct name Andrew Spencer) to make grills for some windows facing the riverside. She gave Andy an advance of $10,000 after he had told her the grills would cost a total of $20,000.
The statement said Andy never turned up to do the job and showed him a long gun and told him that he wished to rob the house that night and advised the accused that he should leave the door open. The accused said that his accomplice had warned if word of his plan to rob the house got out, he would kill him the accused.
Inspector Julius Wright visited the scene and questioned several persons. He spoke with the accused at the police station and put the allegation to him and cautioned him.
The accused said: “Inspector I can’t take it anymore…Is Andy kill she.” The accused declined to put what he said in writing.
The following day, at 5.30 a.m. Inspector Wright went to Andy’s home where he put the allegation to him and cautioned him. Andy maintained his innocence and was taken to the police station where a confrontation was held between he and the accused.
In the presence of Inspector Wright, the accused repeated his story and Andy denied it. But, later that day the accused took Inspector Wright and a party of policemen into his aunt’s home where Constable Wilburg retrieved a pair of gold bangles from a ceiling which was identified by the accused.
These bangles were lodged at the police station and Inspector Wright then told the accused that he had reason to believe that he had murdered his aunt and he cautioned him. The accused replied: “Inspector is me and Andy involved.” The accused was told that he could put what he had to say in writing and he, again, indicated that he and Andy were involved and that he would give a statement to the effect. That statement was given and was admitted at the preliminary inquiry.
State Counsel Konyo Thompson and Renita Singh conducted the case for the Prosecution
Attorney-at-Law Miss Latchmie Rahamat while accepting the probation report yesterday, claimed that the report was unbalanced.