Judge may allow murder convict to sue over DNA decision
A judge is “minded to grant leave” to a convicted murderer to sue the island’s top prosecutor for refusing to refer the DNA evidence in his case for independent expert review.
Jay Dill, who was jailed for life in 2013 for fatally shooting footballer Randy Robinson, filed an application in the Supreme Court in March for permission to seek a judicial review of a decision taken by Cindy Clarke, the Director of Public Prosecutions.
It followed the quashing by the Privy Council in London of the murder and attempted murder convictions of Julian Washington owing to inaccurate evidence given at his trial by Candy Zuleger, of Florida-based Trinity DNA Solutions.
Dill, 37, said in a sworn affidavit that Ms Clarke refused to disclose material relating to a subsequent review she conducted of convictions involving expert evidence from Trinity and Ms Zuleger, and refused to refer his murder conviction for independent expert review.
He claimed the decision denied him “access to the information necessary to determine whether my conviction was affected by the flawed DNA methodology identified” in Mr Washington’s case.
Assistant Justice Hugh Southey KC, in a September 24 order seen by The Royal Gazette, wrote that there were “real issues raised about the response to the previous failures in relation to DNA testing” in Dill’s application.
He noted that leave should be granted where there was an arguable ground for judicial review with a realistic prospect of success, stating: “I am minded to grant leave.”
However, Mr Justice Southey was concerned Ms Clarke may not have been sent a “pre-action letter” and had been given no opportunity to respond.
He directed that she respond in writing within 21 days and said he would then make a decision on whether to grant leave.
Ms Clarke told Dill in a January 20 letter that his case was not referred to the independent DNA expert involved in the review “because, having considered the nature of the evidence as a whole, I concluded that your conviction was safe, irrespective of the DNA evidence provided by Ms Zuleger”.
Prosecutors said at the 2013 trial of Dill that DNA from him, as well as gunshot residue component particles, were found on motorcycles seized as part of the inquiry into Mr Robinson’s murder.
Further component particles were found on clothing belonging to the defendant.
In 2016, the Court of Appeal threw out an appeal by Dill against his murder conviction, finding that although the evidence in the case was circumstantial, it was compelling.
Adley Duncan, the Acting Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions, said last week: “The DPP has been in contact with Mr Jay Dill, who has directly raised with her issues he has with her management of a voluntary process of review of his case following the Privy Council ruling in Julian Washington.
“He has referred the matter to the court, and the Department of Public Prosecutions welcomes the opportunity to address his concerns in court and await a judicial resolution.”
He added that Mr Dill’s application to the court was ex parte — ie, without the involvement of the other party — so had not initially been seen by the DPP.
A copy of the application was therefore sought by her and has now been reviewed, with the DPP planning to reply to the court before the 21-day deadline.
Jay Dill was found guilty alongside co-accused Devon Hewey of the murder of footballer Randy Robinson — but Mr Hewey had his conviction set aside by the Privy Council in 2022 because of deficiencies in the trial judge’s directions concerning gunshot-residue evidence.
In July, the jury in Mr Hewey’s retrial was discharged after multiple interruptions during the proceedings.
He was then formally discharged from the Supreme Court after the Director of Public Prosecutions found it was not in the public interest to retry him a second time.
Dill wrote to the Governor in August asking him to refer his case to the Court of Appeal, under Section 27(a) of the Court of Appeal Act 1964 and after consultation with the Advisory Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy.
The letter, seen by the Gazette, stated that “unearthed e-mails” were disclosed during Mr Hewey’s retrial which showed that police spoke to a witness who saw Dill at the time of the murder of Mr Robinson at another location, confirming his alibi.
Dill wrote: “None of this was disclosed to me at my trial in 2013, at my appeal in 2016, or at any time before June 2026.
“At my trial, the jury was told that nobody at the [Mid-Atlantic Boat] Club had been prepared to give a statement.”
He added that he was “pursuing the remedies” available to him and intended to bring the matter before the Court of Appeal at a future session “by way of an application for an extension of time, leave to appeal and leave to adduce fresh evidence”.
Dill wrote: “I make the present application so that, should any procedural obstacle attend that route, the way to the Court of Appeal remains open …”
The Governor, Andrew Murdoch, rejected the request on September 25, noting he had consulted the committee.
Dill has since replied, indicating he intends to ask the Supreme Court for leave to apply for judicial review of the Governor’s decision.
Darrin Simons, the Commissioner of Police, was asked for comment for this article, but said it would be “inappropriate” to do so “at this time”.
• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers
