Acquitted murder-accused Quincy Stanley (Jimbo) Brangman is likely to appeal after being sentenced yesterday to eight years for wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

The 24-year-old, who was found not guilty on Wednesday of stabbing Tekle Zion Mallory to death outside the Ice Queen restaurant in Paget in July 2001, was handed down the sentence in Supreme Court yesterday morning.

The jury found the Sandys father guilty of assaulting Mr. Mallory's friend, Lemuel Weeks, during the early morning brawl outside the take-away restaurant.

He was also found guilty of being in possession of an offensive weapon - a knife - on the same date.

Yesterday, after Assistant Justice Archibald Warner imposed an eight-year term on Brangman, to run consecutively to a three-and-a-half-year sentence he is currently serving for assault, the defendant's lawyer and family said they were looking at the possibility of appealing.

Peter Thornton QC said: "We are considering an appeal.

"We shall consider both the question of the convictions and the length of the sentence, but we shall take the proper, sensible time to consider. We shall not rush into anything, and will give careful consideration to all the relevant factors."

Mr. Thornton QC refused to comment on the length of sentence, or the jury's verdicts.

Assistant Justice Warner, in sentencing, said he had taken into consideration Brangman's mitigation - that he was only 24 and the father of a young child, and the issue of provocation.

The court heard how Mr. Weeks had smashed a bottle in the face of Brangman during the fight.

And the judge said he had also considered the defence's claim that Brangman should not be given consecutive sentences for both the offences of wounding and possession of the knife, as the stabbing would not have occurred without the presence of a knife.

But Assistant Justice Warner said he had to agree with prosecutor Vinette Graham-Allen that Brangman had a tendency for violent behaviour.

The Crown counsel had asked that the defendant be given the maximum ten years for the wounding, and two years for possession of the knife, to run separately.

After the jury had confirmed their verdicts; ten to two in favour of not guilty for murder, and nine votes to three in favour of guilty to both the assault and possession, Brangman was asked if he wished to say anything, but he declined.

The judge said he had considered all of the relevant factors, including Brangman's previous convictions for violent offences.

He said: "I agree that the defendant has a propensity for violence. I must bear in mind increased violence in this community as it relates to these types of crimes." And he said it was the duty of the court to provide a deterrent.

"This sentence should reflect the deterrence, in addition to the appropriate sentence for the crime," he added.

"In all the circumstances, the sentence is eight years imprisonment on count two (wounding), and no additional sentence on count three (possession).

"In any event, if I had imposed a sentence on count three it would have been concurrent. The sentence on count two is to run consecutive to any sentence now being served."

Brangman's father, Barry Wellman, last night said the family was looking to appeal.

And he said he had been somewhat surprised at the jury's decision.

"I was obviously very glad that he was proved innocent of the murder charge - that was very important, but I was shocked at the jury's decision to believe Lemuel Weeks' version about the wounding.

"Nobody saw the stabbing of Weeks, apart from Weeks himself.

"Nothing surprised me throughout the trial because everything was pretty much as Quincy had told me beforehand. It was consistent. He always denied the stabbings."

And Mr. Brangman said he still believed a third, unknown person was involved in the attack on Mr. Mallory, and said he believed that was the person who stabbed him to death.

He said a witness claiming to see the third person with a "silver, shiny object" during the attack on Mr. Mallory did not seem to have been taken very seriously.

And he said blood DNA belonging to a fifth, mystery person, at the scene should have been cleared up and identified before charges were brought.

"I don't think it has been conducted properly," he said.

Police refused to comment yesterday.