DPP appeals Judge Volney’s decision

They were charged in November, 2004, for the 1994 murder of Dr Chandra Naraynsingh.

The appeal was filed under Section 65 (e) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act in keeping with the recent Privy Council ruling in the Brad Boyce appeal.

The DPP’s grounds for appeal were that the trial judge erred in law when he invited the trial jury to stop the case when they had no justification, or jurisdiction to do so; and even if the jury had residual power to stop the criminal trial the circumstances of the case did not justify the judge reminding the jury of such power; that the jury retired to consider a verdict with no directions on the law or instructions from the trial judge. The jury deliberated for 40 minutes.

The DPP also said the appellant was deprived of the right to have the jury to consider the case based on law and facts; Justice Volney misdirected the jury on the approach they should take in exercising the power to stop the case by denying them the option to disagree among themselves as to whether they wished to stop the case or not.

Volney directed that they must all agree in whatever verdict they come to.

Another ground of appeal was that Volney’s actions and directions effectively meant that the case was withdrawn from the jury’s proper consideration.