CUMMINGS LODGE, East Coast Demerara (ECD) resident, Ravindra “Ravin” Ramdeen, has been sentenced to 21 years and four months in prison for the 2020 murder of 53-year-old Merlyn “Jean” Singh, with whom he was in a relationship.

Ramdeen, 57, was sentenced on Wednesday by Justice Priscilla Chandra-Hanif at the High Court in Demerara after pleading guilty to the murder, bringing to an end the case arising from Singh’s death at her Cummings Lodge home.

The court heard that Ramdeen, a father of four, and Singh were acquainted and had been involved in a relationship. The fatal incident occurred between December 10 and 11, 2020, at Singh’s home at Lot 415, Eighth Street, South-East Cummings Lodge.

Justice Chandra-Hanif said the evidence before the court showed that Ramdeen and Singh had initially engaged in consensual sexual activity.

She explained that after the encounter, the two spoke and Ramdeen indicated that he wanted to have sex with Singh again. When she refused, the judge said, Ramdeen grabbed her, causing her to strike her head.

He then placed his hands around her neck to prevent her from calling out and proceeded to have sexual intercourse with her while choking her. Following the assault, Ramdeen left the house, leaving Singh unconscious and without rendering assistance to the woman.

Singh’s lifeless body was subsequently discovered in her bedroom.

The judge added that the violence caused Singh’s death, with the post-mortem findings establishing manual strangulation and head trauma as the causes contributing to her death.

Ramdeen was arrested and charged with murder and was initially brought before Magistrate Alisha George at the Sparendaam Magistrate’s Court. Because the charge was indictable, he was not required to enter a plea at that stage and was remanded to prison before eventually being committed to stand trial at the Demerara Criminal Assizes.

At Wednesday’s sentencing hearing, defence attorney Ronald Bostwick urged the court to take into account his client’s guilty plea, personal circumstances and lack of previous convictions.

Bostwick described Ramdeen as remorseful and said there had been no animosity between his client and Singh. He also highlighted Ramdeen’s difficult upbringing, noting that he had started working at a young age following the separation of his parents.

Ramdeen had maintained steady employment and had most recently worked as a security officer.

Bostwick further submitted that Ramdeen’s actions amounted to selfishness arising from his desire to have sex when Singh did not want to. He asked the court to consider the circumstances in determining the sentence.

Ramdeen also addressed the court and expressed remorse.

He told the court, “I want to say I’m sorry about the whole situation. I should have known better.”

He said he had spent years in prison trying to rehabilitate himself and become a better person, and appealed for leniency because of his children.

“I love my family very much,” Ramdeen said, asking the court for an opportunity to return to society and be a responsible father.

Singh’s brother described her as a loving and caring person, stating it hurt him to know that Ramdeen, who was acquainted with their family, had raped and killed his sister.

State prosecutors, attorneys-at-law Aleria Heywood and Nelissa Peterkin, urged the court to impose a substantial sentence, emphasising the seriousness and prevalence of rape and the circumstances surrounding Singh’s death.

They maintained that the killing occurred in the course of a sexual assault, pointing to the cause of death and the violence used against Singh.

The prosecutors also rejected Ramdeen’s account that Singh enjoyed being choked, insisting that the evidence established that she was murdered.

In determining an appropriate sentence, Justice Chandra-Hanif placed significant emphasis on the circumstances in which Singh was killed and the sexual violence that preceded her death.

The judge said the case involved the violation of Singh’s bodily autonomy and her right to refuse sexual activity. “Sexual violence accompanied by fatal violence requires emphatic denunciations,” Justice Chandra-Hanif said.

She added that the sentence must make clear that “a person’s refusal of sex is imperative” and that force, coercion and violence would not be tolerated.

The judge found that Singh’s refusal was clear and that Ramdeen nevertheless used significant force against her. She noted that the violence began after Singh had refused to engage in further sexual activity and ultimately resulted in her death.

Justice Chandra-Hanif also considered the fact that the strangulation was sustained and that Singh suffered head trauma. The court noted that the violence occurred inside Singh’s home, where she was entitled to feel safe.

Another aggravating factor was Ramdeen’s conduct after the attack.

The judge noted that after the sexual assault and strangulation, Ramdeen did not seek assistance for Singh despite observing that she was unresponsive.

Justice Chandra-Hanif said the circumstances demonstrated the gravity of the offending and required a substantial custodial sentence.

Justice Chandra-Hanif adopted 35 years as the starting point for the sentence, having regard to the seriousness of the offence and the aggravating circumstances.

His lack of previous convictions and his personal circumstances were also considered, along with the character references submitted on his behalf and his expressions of remorse.

Justice Chandra-Hanif then deducted three years for the mitigating factors, bringing the sentence to 32 years. However, the judge stressed that personal circumstances could not diminish the seriousness of the violence.  The judge subsequently applied a one-third reduction for Ramdeen’s early guilty plea, amounting to a deduction of 10 years and eight months.

That brought the final sentence to 21 years and four months in prison, from which the time the convict had already spent in pre-trial custody is to be deducted by the Guyana Prison Service.