By Tahna Weston and Kisean Joseph
One of the four men who was involved in the high-profile murder case of former gas station attendant Dorothy Prince has been successful in his appeal, having his murder conviction substituted and his sentence reduced.
Omari “Boots” Phillip, through his attorney, Lawrence Daniels, made an application in the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court of Appeal against his conviction and sentence.
Phillip, along with co-accused ex-soldier Timorie Elliott, was unanimously convicted for Prince’s murder on May 20, 2016.
The prosecution had put forward a case claiming that Phillip and Elliott along with two other men — Deon “Ticks” Thomas and ex-police constable Gideon Jackson — were part of a four-man joint enterprise who robbed Dee’s Service Station on Old Parham Road sometime after 9 pm on February 17, 2012.
During the trial evidence was led that two of the robbers were armed with guns and one of them shot and killed Prince.
The jury returned guilty verdicts for the offence of murder against Phillip and Elliot. The appellant (Phillip) was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment, with a review after 18 years.
Dissatisfied with the case’s outcome, Phillip appealed advancing several grounds including the impact of adverse media coverage on the fairness of the trial, the judge’s summing-up and his directions to the jury and directions on the defence of alibi, on which Phillip depended.
It was his claim that he did not know his co-accused and was not present at the robbery since he was at home all day and had slept through the night. His brother was called in support of his alibi.
This case attracted widespread publicity and what Phillip’s lawyer said was also adverse publicity prior to and during the course of the trial.
Daniel claimed that the impact of adverse media coverage could have impacted on the fairness of the trial resulting in his client being sentenced to over 20 years in prison.
He also asked the court to take into consideration the fact that the trial judge refused to declare a mistrial after the press falsely reported in a national newspaper that “the clothes worn during the robbery was found at Phillip’s house”.
After hearing submissions from Daniels and Crown Counsel Rilys Adams, who represented the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Court of Appeal ordered that a verdict of manslaughter should replace the verdict of guilty of murder.
Additionally, Phillip’s 25-year prison sentence was set aside and substituted with a sentence of six years, five months and 23 days.
The three justices of appeal, Trevor Ward, Margaret Price Findlay and Esco Henry — in substituting the murder sentence for manslaughter, said the appropriate sentence the court would have imposed is a 19-year prison sentence. He, however, has already served 12 years, seven months and seven days behind bars, with the prison authorities already deducting the 297 days he had initially spent on remand.
The Court of Appeal felt that the judge did not err in not declaring a mistrial as the defence had requested concerning the false media report of clothing being found at the appellant’s home, but exercised his discretion to proceed with the trial having given the jury the proper warnings.
However, Phillip succeeded on the grounds that the judge erred in his directions to the jury regarding the mental element necessary “to fix the appellant with liability for murder”
According to the court, “This makes the appellant’s conviction for murder unsafe. I have, however, concluded that on the facts which the jury must have accepted in finding the appellant guilty of murder, there was cogent evidence on which the jury must have been satisfied that the appellant intentionally participated in the robbery in the course of which Dorothy Prince’s death was caused, and that a reasonable person would have realised that, in the course of the robbery, some physical harm might be caused to some person. In those circumstances I would apply section 40(2) of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court Act and substitute the jury’s verdict with a conviction for manslaughter.”
The Court of Appeal also felt that the circumstances relating to the commission of the offence cannot be overlooked, in that the appellant played a leading role in the venture; and was intricately involved in the planning of the offence.
“He must therefore shoulder a high degree of culpability.”
Of the other three men involved in the robbery, Jackson turned state’s witness, pleaded guilty to his crime, and was sentenced to 12 years, while Elliott is serving a 23-year prison term. Thomas died on July 12, 2012 while awaiting trial, and was buried some five years later.
