“The jury having returned a verdict of guilty, you shall be taken from this court to a place of lawful execution and you are to be hanged by the rope until dead. May the Lord have mercy on you.” These were the words of Justice Brassington Reynolds as he handed down the sentence to Nazrudeen Jhoot, also called “Buddy” for the killing of Khemlall Mangal on August 25, 2008.
The 21-year-old was found guilty by a mixed Berbice jury last Thursday and given the death sentence. Asked if he had anything to say before the sentence was handed down, Jhoot said “no”.
Earlier Justice Reynolds had tasked the jury with the duty of determining whether the accused injured Mangal. “This will be determined by your acceptance or rejection of the caution statement which the accused allegedly gave to the police.” He told the jury if they believed the accused, then they need to acquit him, but if they did not believe him, they need to go back to Inspector Karrenauth Bejaimal. They also need to consider that the defence discredited the inspector, arguing that that his evidence does not seem logical, given the timing and sequence of evidence as related by the officer.
“There are material discrepancies with the timing of two officers as it relates to the time the caution statement was made. You first need to determine the reason for the discrepancy and if it was because of a lapse of memory because of the time elapsed…”
During the trial, Jhoot in his evidence said he had left his Cotton Tree home on August 25, 2008 to go to Lethem to seek employment. This was after his mother had given him consent. He told the court that for three to four days, he tried to call Mangal’s daughter Lisa, but could not get through. “When I did get through, she was crying and told me that her father was killed.”
Justice Renolds in his address to the jury said the accused had placed himself in a place other than the crime scene. “If you heard him, he seems to be a fairly intelligent man. It is for you to determine whether you believe his story.”
In an earlier address to the jury, defence counsel Charrandas Persaud said from his evidence, the accused had nothing to do with the crime. “He was nowhere around the crime scene. There is no linkage to the knife found in the trench and the accused.” He argued that the accused fell in love with a girl who was a little too young at the time. “His mother testified that she confronted the accused and told him that she disapproved of the relationship. She also testified that the accused never had an altercation with the now deceased. He was picked up in Lethem because of Lisa. If he was wanted, he could have gone to one of the islands, but he went to Lethem because he knew that he was not wanted for murder,” the defence lawyer said.
He stressed that there is no evidence before the court that the knife was used to kill Mangal. “What about the piece of paper they call a caution statement? The signatures on it do not match,” the attorney concluded.
