THE Appellate Court on Tuesday set aside the death sentences of Elmo Benedict and Dave Banwarie, and terms of 25 years were imposed.

The two were sentenced to death by presiding judge Justice James Bovell-Drakes for the March 2008 murder of Rakesh Rajaram. However, Chancellor of the Judiciary, Yonette Cummings and Justices of Appeal Dawn Gregory and Rishi Persaud agreed to substitute the murder conviction with manslaughter.

Counsel for the accused, Attorney Mark Conway, argued on the grounds that the learned trial judge failed to give proper guidance on the standard of proof, failed to direct the jury on guidance for manslaughter in the absence of provocation; and failed to adequately address the jury on provocation. He also argued that the sentence was too severe, given the circumstances of the case.

Benedict and Banwarie went to the camp of Rajaram in search of Romena Benedict, who is the sister of Elmo and reputed wife of Banwarie.

In summary, Conway argued that based on the caution statements and facts of the matter, the men’s intention was not to kill Rajaram; as such, they should have been tried for manslaughter as opposed to murder.

Conway said his clients acted out of provocation as Rajaram had taken Romena by force and it appeared to be a case of adultery. The two men went to her rescue armed with a cutlass and a hose to defend her.

Considering the evidence, counsel said that after his clients had beaten Ramjaram and realised that he was badly beaten to the point where he could not stand, they built a stretcher out of wood and fetched him out to the landing to get help.

“If their intention was to kill, they would not have carried him out from where they were. They would have left him to die,” Conway said.

He also noted that while Benedict was beating Rajaram, he said to him: “As long as you live, don’t mess around my sister.” This, he said, indicated that he was not going to kill him and should be grounds for a manslaughter charge.

Representing the state, Attorney Diana Kaulesar-O’Brien stated that the learned trial judge had given directions on intention and aspects of it. Making reference to previous cases before the court, she presented further arguments to defend her premise.

After hearing both sides, the court agreed to make the substitution, and the 25-year sentences were imposed. The court also ordered that the time spent incarcerated should be deducted from the 25 years.