No appeal in sentencing reviews

The three appellate judges — CJ Sharma and Justices Margot Warner and Stanley John — who had laid down some guidelines for sentencing reviews in the Chuck Attin case, also explained yesterday that many decisions would have to be made by the reviewing judge.

The court noted that for some questions there could not be a specific rule because the circumstances would vary from case to case, and the reviewing judge would have to use his discretion to make certain decisions.

The court also observed that the prison authority will continue most of its usual procedures. However, reports which were once sent to the Minister of National Security will now be sent to the court — the registrar.

This change came about under the doctrine of Separation of Powers, since prisoners are no longer sentenced at the President’s Pleasure, but at the Court’s Pleasure instead.

The three appellate judges yesterday dealt with questions raised by attorneys who had appeared in the Attin matter, who wanted further clarification on rulings of the court in that appeal.

They were special prosecutor Bindra Dolsingh, and Attin’s attorneys Mark Seepersad and Gerald Ramdeen. Also in attendance yesterday were Deputy Commissioner of Prisons Herman Rougier, who spoke of some of the prisons’ procedures and programmes for young inmates graduating from the Youth Training Centre to adult prisons.

The CJ said that appeals are governed by statute, and a prisoner coming up for review has already exhausted his appeals and has been sentenced. His review is to be determined by his progress, if any, and what more could be done.

Depending on the prison report and the findings of the review hearing, the prisoner could have his sentence shortened by varying periods of time.

Attin, who committed a brutal double murder of two women — Candice Scott and Karen Sa Gomes — on July 11, 1994, was sentenced to 25 years. However, because of his age, he was sent to YTC and then transferred to an adult prison. He should be eligible for release by the year 2013, if not before, for good behaviour. His partner in the crime, Noel Seepersad, who was older, was sentenced to death.

Attorneys were commended for their contributions in the matter and assisting the court. Special mention was made of the pioneering work done by Ramdeen and Seepersad, and they were called on to assist the prison authority in this respect.