Miner jailed for 28 years on manslaughter charge

By Ahreefa Bacchus

Orin Jerrick of Anns Grove, East Coast Demerara, accused of murdering Gavin Fifee, a minibus driver stabbed to death at the Plaisance Bus Park on July 31, 2014, was Monday last sentenced to 28 years in prison for manslaughter.

The sentence was handed down by Justice Navindra Singh after the jury found Jerrick not guilty on a murder charge but guilty of manslaughter.

The Prosecution and Defence rested their case on Friday last.

According to reports, at about 05:45h on the day in question, Fifee was loading his minibus at Plaisance when the accused began urinating on the wheel. When Fifee confronted the man, an argument ensued after which Jerrick pulled out a knife and stabbed him to the upper right chest.

Fifee was rushed to the Georgetown Public Hospital (GPH) by public-spirited citizens but he succumbed while receiving medical attention.

A few days later, Jerrick turned himself in to the Police and was put on trial at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court. He was committed to stand trial at the High Court after a prima facie case was established before Magistrate Judy Latchman.

In the High Court, the Jury heard testimonies from eight witnesses, who were presented by State Prosecutors Narissa Leander and Michael Shahoud and cross-examined by Defence Counsels Nigel Hughes and Peter Hugh.

On Friday the Prosecution’s final witness was State Pathologist Dr Nehaul Singh, who testified to conducting a post mortem. Dr Singh related that the deceased died as a result of perforation of the lung due to a single stab wound. This, the doctor related, would have had to be inflicted using a weapon that is at least nine centimetres long, however, he stated that it could not have been inflicted by the cutlass that the deceased allegedly had in his possession.

Finally, when the time came for the defendant to give his statement, he opted to give an unsworn statement from the prisoner’s dock: “I am innocent of this story,” were the words Jerrick uttered in his defence.

With that said, Hughes commenced his address to the jury. Hughes reminded them of the elements that the Prosecution needed to prove in order to convict his client.

He stated that the police must investigate every version of the incident, which they failed to do.

“Not a single person who testified in this case saw how the man died, or how the single stab wound was inflicted”, he related, adding that this may lead to speculation.

He further related that none of the witnesses were certain of the suspect’s identity, making reference to the fact that witness Dawson had pointed out his client as the perpetrator during the ID parade but during cross-examination had admitted she had not seen the perpetrator’s face.

He linked this conflict to the fact that most of the Prosecution’s witnesses testified to three varying incidents, adding that they all described the suspect to be wearing different clothes.

The attorney went on to relate inconsistencies in various testimonies which all contribute to the conclusion that the state failed to prove its case.

“They don’t have any evidence,” Hughes said and rested his case.

However, Prosecutor Leander refuted these claims, stating that the state had proven each element of murder in the case. She stated that while the defence made a big deal of the lack of witness identification, the defendant had placed himself at the scene of the incident in his statement to the Police, adding that he also admitted to being in a confrontation with a minibus driver.

“We’re not assuming anything… he went to the Police with his attorney,” she stated. She questioned the reason for the defendant turning himself into the Police in the company of his attorney if he was innocent.

She posited that the Prosecution need not bring witnesses to say that they saw, when the fatal wound was inflicted as circumstantial evidence would lead to the correct inference. With this statement she rested her case.

On Monday, after deliberations the foreman announced that they had come up with a unanimous not guilty verdict of murder. However, on the manslaughter charge, there was a disproportionate verdict of not guilty which was 11-1.

In making the mitigation plea, Hughes related that his client was remorseful and regretted the circumstances for which the incident occurred, adding that his client wished to offer his sympathies to the family of the deceased. He related that his client has no antecedents and is not a threat to society. He further stated that the evidence shows that his client was attacked and acted in self-defence, however the reaction may have been a tad excessive. As such, he sought the Court’s mercy for his client.

However, when Justice Singh asked the defendant what he wished to say, Jerrick replied with a brief “I didn’ juk nobody at the park, I didn’t bore nobody”.

“I am disappointed,” was Justice Singh’s response to Jerrick’s utterance. Justice Singh stated that he was deeply moved by the Defence Counsel’s mitigation plea and the fact that he declared that Jerrick is remorseful. However, he stated that from Jerrick’s response, there were no signs of remorse or regret which should deter him from delivering the maximum sentence.

He then revealed that while the maximum penalty for manslaughter is 30 years, he would sentence him to 28 years as Jerrick had already spent two years on remand.