Kerry Cromwell was yesterday morning handed a life sentence with the possibility of parole only after serving 50 years for the murder of Linden minibus driver Elvin Lorrimer, who was gunned down just over three years ago.
Cromwell was convicted by a jury last month for the death of the bus driver, who was shot during a robbery on Hadfield Street on the night of March 21st, 2016. His sentencing had, however, been deferred for a probation report.
Loud wails from the convict’s relatives pervaded the courtroom of Justice Navindra Singh following the announcement of the sentence yesterday.
Demonstrations of their vociferous dissatisfaction lasted for some time on the corridors and on the street outside the courthouse of the High Court in Georgetown.
Given a chance to address the judge, Cromwell, who sought to profess his innocence, said that he was being imprisoned for something he did not do and for which he had no knowledge.
According to the 26-year-old father of two, “I never kill nobody.”
He claimed that he had been locked up by the police for the killing only after he learnt about it.
The probation report, prepared and presented by Social Services Officer Maloma Bristol, was not read in full to the court. After being tendered in the sentencing hearing, however, references were made by both the prosecution and court to specific aspects of the document.
Noting that Bristol had been told by some residents of the Albouystown community, where Cromwell resided, that he was at home at the time of the shooting, Prosecutor Abigail Gibbs grilled her on whether she had names or addresses for any of those persons whom she claimed had related that information to her.
Bristol said she did not but agreed with the prosecutor that in hindsight it would have been wise for her to have collected such details from at least one of those persons.
The probation officer said, too, that in her interview with residents, they related being often “targeted by the police.”
Informing that never once during the trial was any evidence ever presented to suggest that Cromwell was at home at the time of the shooting, Justice Singh enquired from Bristol whether she made any attempts to ascertain from the purported alibi witnesses the reason none of them came forward to testify on Cromwell’s behalf.
According to Bristol, she did make that enquiry but was told by those persons that they did not get involved as they thought that the man’s mother would have interacted with them and made that request.
Describing the probation report as “one-sided” and not knowing “what to make of it,” Justice Singh pointed out that not even in leading his defence did Cromwell ever take the opportunity to say that he had been at home at the time of the murder.
This observation was also made by Gibbs.
Alluding to the fact that his client had not related to him of ever being at home at the time the crime was committed either, defence attorney Stanley Moore sought to make it clear that as a lawyer he could only act on instructions given by his client.
After the sentence was imposed, many of the man’s angry relatives shouted to the top of their voices that he was innocent and had been at home with home them on the night in question.
None of those persons, however, ever came forward as witnesses to so testify in Cromwell’s defence.
As a matter of fact, Bristol had said that the information provided to her of the offender being at home came from a group of men she had met under a shed on the road in Albouystown. The probation officer never spoke of the man’s family providing any such detail.
In a mitigating plea on his client’s behalf, Moore begged the judge for mercy and for the imposition of a sentence that would afford him the opportunity of returning to his children and society where, given his age, he can still make valuable contributions.
For her part, however, Prosecutor Gibbs asked the judge to consider from the probation report that a “loving father and caring husband” had lost his life—a loss, she said, by which his family is still traumatised.
She said that the man’s wife has not been enjoying the best of health since his passing.
Gibbs told the court, too, that Lorrimer was the sole breadwinner of his household, which had been left with financial constraints following his death.
Citing further aggravating factors, she begged the judge to also consider that Cromwell had previous brushes with the law—for narcotic possession in 2014, and escaping the Lusignan Prison in 2017.
She said that whatever sentence was being imposed, it needed to send a strong message that such errant behaviour would not be condoned. “Crime is not the way and crime doesn’t pay,” the prosecutor added.
Before imposing the sentence, Justice Singh questioned how it is that it would be possible for him to exercise mercy when the convict was “clearly not even sorry for what had happened.”
At this point of the judge’s address, Cromwell interjected, again professing his innocence, stating that he had two young baby girls “out there.”
The judge sounded a stern warning to Cromwell that he had his time to speak and there were to be no interruptions as he [the judge] spoke.
Pointing to the sons of the deceased who were seated in the courtroom, Justice Singh then rhetorically enquired from the convict if he thought that they would be able to ever again see their father.
Justice Singh informed Cromwell that the law gives him the power to impose a sentence of death by hanging. Noting, however, that no one has been hanged in the last 20 years, the judge said he regarded imposing such a sentence to be an exercise in futility.
He then announced the sentence to be life in prison and ordered that 50 years be served before parole could be considered, though noting that deductions are to be made for time spent on remand awaiting trial.
Lorrimer was gunned down as he stood outside his minibus seeking passengers.
During the trial, Detective Corporal Alexie Annys had told the court that he saw when Cromwell shot Lorrimer.
According to Annys, he was in his barrack room, located in the compound of the Public Buildings, when he heard loud explosions which he suspected to be gunshots.
Alerted by the sounds, Annys said he immediately exited his room and went to the southern fence at Hadfield Street, where he had a clear view of the accused, who at the time was holding a black object, which he identified as being a pistol.
The witness had told the court that he saw Cromwell shoot Lorrimer during the encounter, which lasted for some 40 seconds. He had said that he and the shooter made eye contact for about six seconds.
Annys then went on to testify of being able, in no more than 10 seconds, to positively point out Cromwell from a lineup of eight men on an identification parade, as the person whom he saw shoot at Lorrimer.
