Appeal Court adjourns rape and robbery case

The Court of Appeal adjourned a robbery and rape  matter yesterday to get the notes of evidence at the trial to check out certain aspects of the evidence. The court, comprising Chief Justice Satnarine Sharma and Justices Lionel Jones and Stanley John, made the decision after hearing arguments on the second of six grounds of appeal filed by attorney Devan Rampersad, representing appellant Winty Roberts aka “Momoy.” Two bothers, Winty, and Keith Roberts, aka “Pam Pam,” were convicted of three counts of rape, three counts of robbery, one count of grievous sexual assault and one count of attempted arson. At their appeals yesterday, Rampersad argued that the trial judge had failed to direct the prosecution to edit the oral statement of co-appellant Keith Roberts. As a result of that failure, it became prejudicial because the statement named his client as being present at the scene of the alleged rape offence.

Secondly, he contended that the direction of the judge to the jury to disregard the alleged prejudicial contents of the statement, as not evidence to rely on, could not cure the prejudice. His third point was that by editing the statement, it would have saved the prejudice against Winty and not take anything away from the prosecution’s case. The fourth point was that since Keith denied he made the statement, it could not affect his defence adversely either. Rampersad was arguing his second ground that in all the circumstances of the case, Winty did not receive a fair trial, when the court opted to have the notes of evidence. Rampersad also argued that the judge had failed to analyse the weaknesses in the prosecution’s case for the jury, itemising the several areas. He indicated to the court that while the evidence suggests that his client admits the robberies, he denied the rapes. Apart from Keith’s statement, the only other evidence that puts Winty on the scene of the rape is the identification of his voice by one of the women.

On this issue, Rampersad contended that the judge also failed to give directions on the distance between the victim and Winty when she allegedly recognised his voice; how long he spoke, how loud, and the fact that it was a stressful situation. Winty, who had two previous convictions, was sentenced to 15 years on each count of rape to run concurrently, and ten years on the count of assault to run consecutive to the rape sentences. On each count of robbery, he received 15 years which will run together with the rape sentences, and five years for attempted arson which will also run together with the rape. This meant he would have to serve a total of 25 years, and in addition he was ordered to receive 15 strokes. His brother Keith will have to serve a total of 20 years, and is to receive ten strokes. Attorney Sean Cazabon is representing Keith, while Dana Seetahal represents the State. Hearing was adjourned to a date to be fixed.