– 16-year sentence affirmed
The Court of Appeal recently dismissed an appeal against sentence by convicted child rapist Frank Cole and affirmed a 16-year sentence imposed at the time of his conviction in the High Court by Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards.
Acting Chancellor Carl Singh and Justices of Appeal, Charles Ramson and BS Roy heard the appeal. Before the actual appeal was heard the court heard an application by counsel for the appellant, Donald Trotman, for leave to be granted for an appeal against conviction, out of time.
The court however pointed out that the application was late by five years and seven months, and that a similar application which was before the court in April 2003 was withdrawn and discontinued, for reasons unknown to the present bench.
But Trotman informed the court that he had been advised by a Justice of Appeal then, that that was an advisable course to adopt. The judges however advised Trotman that they were not prepared to pay any regard to the reason he proffered, since the information he provided was not put on the record and that in any event, they were not prepared consider it a substantial reason.
The court also observed that the only reason which Cole had advanced in 2003 in support of the his application was the same he was advancing in 2008, save that he also contending that he could not file his notice of appeal because the record of appeal was not ready. This latter argument was completely rejected by the court.
The court ruled that no substantial reasons were advanced by Cole in support of his application and dismissed the application without hearing State Counsel, Jo Ann Barlow, Deputy Director of Public Prosecution.
With regard to the appeal against sentence, the antecedent facts were that the child victim demonstrated great respect for Cole and would refer to him as “Uncle Trevor”. On the day in question, she related to the jury that she was at the time 12 years old and was lying in a bed at home when Cole confronted her.
She recounted that she had attempted to get off the bed but that she was pushed back by Cole who forcibly restrained her and tied a piece of cloth around her mouth and then sexually assaulted her. Cole had denied the allegation but his story was obviously disbelieved by the jury. Cole was charged with carnal knowledge.
In affirming the sentence the trial judge, the judges and the court, noted that the court is the custodian of the morality of the nation and that the wrong message would easily be conveyed to persons such as the appellant, who have such perverted inclinations, and to victims of such assaults and their families and the wider society if they disturbed the sentence of the court below.
The justices of appeal also emphasized that they saw it as their clear role in appropriate cases to protect the vulnerable in society from persons such as Cole.
Cole had impregnated the victim, but the child subsequently suffered a miscarriage.
