Court quashes sentences for 3 killers

THREE MEN who were detained at the State’s pleasure after they were convicted of murder have had their sentences quashed.

Madame Justice Mira Dean-Armorer ruled yesterday that the sentences imposed on Leroy Andrews, Ian Seepersad and Roodal Panchoo were illegal and unconstitutional as they were incompatible with the principle of separation of powers. Justice Armorer, presiding at the Port-of-Spain Fifth Civil Court, ordered that Andrews, Seepersad, and Panchoo be detained “during the court’s pleasure.” They were all under the age of 18 when they committed the murders. The three convicts filed constitutional motions challenging their detention at the State’s pleasure. They based their case on the recent decision of Justice Allan Mendonca in the case of woman-killer Chuck Attin whose sentences were quashed on the same ground. Attorneys Mark Seepersad and Gerald Ramdeen appeared for the convicted men, while Assistant Solicitor General Terrence Thorne represented the State.

According to a consent order arrived at between attorneys for the three convicted killers and the State, Andrews, Seepersad and Panchoo are entitled to have their sentences reviewed by the High Court periodically. It was ordered that the three applicants be brought before the High Court sitting in its criminal jurisdiction for a review of their detention forthwith at a date to be fixed by the Registrar of the High Court. But Ramdeen said he wanted to make a submission that the judge, sitting in the civil jurisdiction review the sentences of Seepersad and Panchoo. Justice Armorer said the judgment of Justice Mendonca in the Attin case was very persuasive and invited Ramdeen to persuade to rule against her brother judge. Justice Mendonca had ruled that the review of the sentence was a matter for the High Court sitting in its criminal jurisdiction. Ramdeen said there were two elements for a court to determine. One, he added, was punishment taking into account retribution and deterrence. The other was whether the applicants posed a risk to the public.

Ramdeen said Panchoo has been incarcerated for the past 23 years. He said if the proper sentence had been imposed on Panchoo in 1980, his client would have served his punishment already. He said the Court of Appeal had stated that life imprisonment in this jurisdiction means between 13 and 15 years in jail. He pointed out that Justice James Davis in the Kirkland Paul/Andy Thomas case, stated that life imprisonment could be 10 years or less. He asked that Panchoo and Seepersad be brought before Justice Armorer to be sentenced. “There is one High Court, whether it is criminal or civil, it is one High Court,” Ramdeen added. But Thorne said the judgment of Justice Mendonca was quite clear. He said it was the High Court sitting in the criminal jurisdiction which must deal with a review of sentence. “The criminal court is more than capable of dealing with it,” he assured.

Justice Armorer reserved her decision to nine o’clock this morning. Andrews, 28, was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to the State’s pleasure by Justice Lennox Deyalsingh in the Port-of-Spain Assizes on June 29, 1993 for the murder of Marion Narinesingh, wife of a university Professor. Seepersad and Panchoo were convicted before Justice Mustapha Ibrahim in the San Fernando Assizes on July 21, 1986 and sentenced to the State’s pleasure.