Log In

Reset Password

Benjamin `defended himself'

temple acted in terror of his life, his lawyer told the Court of Appeal yesterday.Defence counsel Mr. Philip Perinchief said the force used by Randy Benjamin, 27,

temple acted in terror of his life, his lawyer told the Court of Appeal yesterday.

Defence counsel Mr. Philip Perinchief said the force used by Randy Benjamin, 27, was in response to a vicious rain of blows from three men wielding crash helmets.

He added the use of the knife was in line with the legal definition of self-defence -- that reasonable force can be used to match the threat -- considering the severity of the attack.

Mr. Perinchief said: "There was evidence at the trial that these could have been life-threatening blows.

"Certainly we know that from a boxer's punch and certainly from a crash helmet that one could sustain serious injury.

"Mr. Benjamin did not act with excessive force -- he responded in kind. One knife, three helmets being aimed viciously at his head.'' Mr. Perinchief was speaking as he launched Benjamin's appeal against conviction and sentence for the unlawful wounding of Michael Robson, Middle Road, Southampton, during a fight outside the Ice Queen in Paget.

Benjamin, then of Lusher Hill, Warwick, was found guilty after trial in February this year, but the jury cleared him of the more serious charge of attempted murder.

Mr. Perinchief has lodged nine grounds for appeal and yesterday gave reasons for finding the knifing was in self-defence or an accident.

Mr. Perinchief admitted that an appeal ground of an accident was "perhaps a novel defence'' in Bermuda.

He added: "But I am obliged to advance any argument which fits the facts. In the heat of battle, with helmets raining down from all directions, if you go to stab someone in the arm or even the finger and they move a certain way and you stab them in the head, that's an accident.'' The incident happened outside the Paget Ice Queen in the early hours of a July morning in 1993.

Sir Derek Cons, one of three judges hearing the appeal, pointed out that self-defence was explained to the jury at the original trial, but they were satisfied Benjamin had gone too far.

Mr. Justice DaCosta said it was clear Benjamin had intended to cause harm when he wielded the knife.

He also noted there was legal precedent when self-defence was advanced that a failure to retire from the fray should be taken into consideration.

And Sir James Astwood, president of the Court of Appeal, said: "Something which has happened which is entirely beyond your control is an accident.''