Brothers Derek and Javon Weeks were both put behind bars for attacking a teenaged bike thief with a sword.

Puisne Judge Carlisle Greaves told the court that the victim, Jahkumani Riley-Smith, lost a finger and nearly lost his head in the incident, suffering a cut to his neck so gruesome he would not allow jurors to see a picture of the injury.

While the judge accepted that the theft of a person’s transportation was capable of “provoking even the angels to mischief”, the violence of the attack was more than excessive.

“No matter the anger, the provocation, it did not merit the kind of an attack that was landed upon this young man,” Mr Justice Greaves said. “There seems to have been no attempt to negotiate, no questions asked, just a random attack. That he is not dead is more of a miracle than anything else.” The court heard during the brother’s Supreme Court trial that on March 8 last year, Mr Riley-Smith and a friend had taken a motorcycle belonging to Javon Weeks from a Devonshire residence. They were then confronted by Derek Weeks, who attacked the teenager with a sword. Javon Weeks also got involved in the fight, kicking Mr Riley-Smith while he was on the ground.

CCTV footage from a nearby home recorded both brothers arriving in the area in a jeep and attacking the teenager.

Mr Riley-Smith lost a ring finger in the attack and suffered a six-inch laceration to his neck, which the court heard passed millimetres away from a major artery.

While the brothers denied involvement in the attack, a jury found both men guilty of wounding Mr Riley-Smith with the intention to cause grievous bodily harm and using a bladed weapon.

During a sentencing hearing yesterday, prosecutor Alan Richards called on the courts to sentence both men to between six and seven years in prison, arguing that even though only one wielded the weapon they were both equally responsible for the attack.

Mr Richards also noted that both men had previously been convicted of assault and possessing offensive weapons in past incidents and, while Derek Weeks accepted some responsibility after his conviction, Javon Weeks has continued to maintain his innocence.

Defence lawyer Charles Richardson, representing Derek Weeks, accepted the Crown’s submissions on sentencing but called on the court to look at the lower end of the spectrum.

He added that his client, a father of three, has admitted that he has an anger management issue and invited the court to include some form of treatment as part of his sentence.

Meanwhile lawyer Craig Attridge, representing Javon Weeks, argued that his client deserved a lighter sentence than his brother and suggested that a suspended or partially suspended sentence would not be inappropriate.

Javon Weeks declined to speak to the court on sentencing, instead asking the judge to read a letter he had written, but Derek Weeks took the opportunity to apologise to the court and the victim, adding that he should have pleaded guilty to the charges.

Delivering his sentence, Mr Justice Greaves noted that historically the theft of someone’s transportation would lead to lynchings, but that such vigilante behaviour cannot be accepted in modern Bermuda.

“In the end, it’s really only a material thing,” he said. “There can be no more lynching in any of its forms. There can be no more vigilante attacks with samurai swords, as there was in this case.”

Noting the element of provocation, along with the severity of the injuries suffered, Mr Justice Greaves sentenced Derek Weeks to six years in prison for each of the two offences, ordering both sentences to run concurrently.

In the case of Javon Weeks, the judge said his role in the attack was as an accomplice and, while he was guilty, he did deserve a lighter sentence due to his lesser degree of involvement. Mr Justice Greaves sentenced Javon Weeks to four years in prison, adding that he did not believe it was an appropriate case to suspend any portion of the sentence.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. As we are legally liable for any slanderous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers.