Lowering the jail terms yesterday against the convicts in the murder of Clementine Fiedtkou-Parris, the Guyana Court of Appeal for the second day in a row criticised the base sentence of 60 years applied by Justice Navindra Singh
While the superior court upheld directions given by the trial judge in the conduct of the case, it reiterated the absence of reasons behind the 60-year base sentence used by Judge Singh for murder.
In the court’s ruling on the appeal filed by brothers Orwin and Cleon Hinds and Roy Jacobs, who were each serving an 81-year sentence for the 2011 murder of Fiedtkou-Parris who they were hired to kill, acting Chancellor Yonette Cummings-Edwards lamented the deviation from guidelines and the absence of reasons from Justice Singh in arriving at the 60-year base sentence.
In the circumstances and having regard to legal authorities the Bench comprising the Chancellor and Justices of Appeal Dawn Gregory and Rishi Persaud, found 35 years to be “a more appropriate” starting point.
Therefrom, it endorsed Justice Singh’s decision to modify the sentence up-ward, because of the presence of a number of aggravating factors—though it again made reductions for specific identified factors.
After imposing the 60 years on each of the convicts, Justice Singh added 10 years each for premeditation, an additional 10 years because of the fact that the murder was executed for payment and one additional year owing to the use of a firearm.
The appellate Bench, however, after setting the base at 35 years, added five years for premeditation, and an additional five years, having regard to the number of offenders who participated in the depth of planning their joint enterprise to kill the woman.
The only increase made by the Court of Appeal was an additional four years to what was imposed by Justice Singh for the use of a firearm in the commission of the offence.
Chancellor Cummings-Edwards who read the decision of the Court, said that these were aggravating factors which no doubt warranted some amount of increase to the base sentence.
She added, too, that not only was the deceased elderly and therefore vulnerable, but underscored that she was defenseless and attacked in what should have been the privacy, safety and sanctity of her home.
At the time of sentencing on November 24th, 2015, Justice Singh had ordered that the prison authorities were to ensure remission for the time the convicts would have spent on remand awaiting trial.
While the appellate court said it would not interfere with that direction, the Chancellor said the Bench did, however, think that given the aggravating factors, this particular case would have been ideal, as allowance is specially made for in the law, for a deviation from granting any such remission.
The Hinds brothers, Jacobs and a fourth person—Kevin October— who succumbed to COVID-19 last year, were all found guilty by a jury of murdering Fiedtkou-Parris on June 30th, 2011, as part of a conspiracy for money.
The charge against the quartet stated that they murdered the elderly woman, pursuant to an arrangement whereby money was intended to pass from one person to another.
They stormed into the septuagenarian’s Lot 42 Robb Street home after enquiring for her and thereafter shot and killed her just as she exited her bedroom.
The men then jumped into a waiting car while the injured woman was rushed to the Georgetown Hospital, where she was pronounced dead shortly after.
The evidence led at the trial included a statement from the dead woman’s brother, Fitzroy Fiedtkou, (who is also now deceased), who had identified Jacobs as the shooter.
Among other things, the appellants argued in their individual appeals that Justice Singh made a number of legal errors regarding the admission of certain evidence and adequately putting the defence of alibi to the jury.
The appellate court would find, however, that the Judge in all instances had given adequate directions to the jury and further that none of the complaints raised by the appellants were fatal to their case.
In the circumstances, with the exception of the ground of sentencing which they advanced was too severe, their appeal failed on all other grounds.
Orwin and Cleon Hinds were represented by attorney George Thomas and Adrian Thompson, respectively, while Jacobs was represented by attorney Dexter Todd.
The State’s case meanwhile, was presented by Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, Teshanna James-Lake.
On Monday, finding the 88 years imposed upon him for the murder of his former girlfriend to have been excessive, the Guyana Court of Appeal decreased Jermaine Maynard’s sentence by Justice Singh to 46 years.
