FIVE YEARS FOR FRANKIE

Businessman and ace car racing driver Frankie Boodram was yesterday sentenced to five years hard labour by Justice Paula Mae Weekes, for receiving stolen vehicle parts.

In passing sentence the judge warned that the car stealing industry in Trinidad must be curbed. She said receivers provide a market for stolen auto parts. The court heard an emotional plea from two of Boodram’s three daughters as to why their father should not be jailed. Daughter and entertainer Charlene Boodram, told the court she was hoping for a miracle, as she pleaded with Justice Weekes not to jail her father.

She said: “I believe that if you trust in God, miracles can happen.”  A second daughter, Dr Allison Boodram, also made a similar plea from the witness stand, asking the court: “have mercy on him, he is a good man.” They were among five persons, including former Government Minister of Sports, Marilyn Gordon and former director of Physical Education and Sports, Cecil Walker, who testified as to Boodram’s good character. There were also several testimonials on behalf of Boodram, and 120 signatures petitioning the Port-of-Spain First Criminal Court where Boodram was tried, for leniency.

The announcement of his sentence brought loud cries from his wife Jasmine, and continuous sobs from his daughters and son Franklin.  His distraught wife later told members of the media that justice had not been served. She said her husband was set up, and described the jury as “sleeping”. Boodram, a 55-year-old San Juan car and parts dealer, was charged with receiving stolen parts and larceny of a pick-up van belonging to Clint Batchasingh. The van was stolen from Alexandra Street, St Clair, on April 22, 2000. The parts Boodram received belonged to the stolen van. He was found not guilty on the larceny charge but guilty on the receiving count by an eight to one majority verdict on February 26, 2003.

In a plea for mitigation, Boodram’s attorneys Israel Khan SC leading Dawn Mohan, asked for a bond instead of a custodial sentence and suggested if the bond was broken, then Boodram should be given the maximum sentence of ten years. He argued that sending Boodram to jail would not really be a deterrent to others because people will continue to steal and receive car parts. Khan said that while he has accepted the verdict of the jury, it was an aberration on the part of Boodram when one takes his client’s  good character into account.

He said the court does not have to reflect public opinion but on the other hand it must not disregard it. Perhaps, he said, the main duty of the court is to lead public opinion. Referring to the case of James Henry Sergeant on punishment, Khan, suggesting a light sentence, asked Justice Weekes “to swim up stream on this one and not to take the line of least resistance by sending him to prison. That he had a good character, and the very fact that men of good character will hear the clanging of the prison gates close behind them is the main punishment and it should not remain closed for a long time.”

In response to some other points raised by Khan, Justice Weekes said that it was not the court’s concern whether Boodram’s automotive “empire” would collapse or of any other consequence as a result of its judgment. She said while Boodram was a first-time offender, the court had a responsibility to be fair and could not afford to be lenient with business people merely on the argument that if sent to jail their business may come “crumbling down,” and be harsh on others who are not as affluent. She said the court was not responsible for Boodram’s self-inflicted punishment.