The Court of Appeal yesterday dismissed the appeal against the unlawful wounding conviction of 24-year-old Grant Forbes.

And they will rule today on appeals by the Crown and Forbes against his six-month prison sentence.

Despite submissions made to the Appeal Court judges by defence lawyer Mr. Saul Froomkin on Monday, regarding the lack of direction given to the jury during the trial by Puisne Judge the Hon. Mr. Justice Ground, Mr. Justice Kempster said they did not believe the jury was misled about facts in the summing up of evidence.

And he added that though there was a misdirection made by Mr. Justice Ground it was "not important enough to result in a miscarriage of justice''.

Mr. Justice Kempster also said the directions given by Mr. Justice Ground on burden and standard of proof, inferences to be drawn, and the issues of self defence were adequate.

But Mr. Froomkin said Mr. Justice Ground did not explain how to resolve issues of doubt to the jury, and this was an essential error.

Mr. Justice Kempster added that the jury had asked for a written definition of grievous bodily harm and although the jury sent a letter stating they could not decide on a majority decision, by the time they returned to court they had reached a majority decision and found Forbes guilty of wounding Derrick Seymour with intent to cause him grievous bodily harm.

Forbes, son of retired Deputy Police Commissioner Alex Forbes, of Railway Trail, Sandys Parish was tried last year for committing the offence with a machete on July 4, 1993.

His victim sustained a six-inch slash to his left shoulder, which required 18 stitches to close.

On the issue of appealing Forbes' six-month prison sentence, Crown Counsel Mr.

Brian Calhoun said: "There is evidence that Bermuda is suffering from a degree of fear of violence.

"Due to violence and the result of violence there must be a sentence that has the effect of deterrence. If one is not deterred people will arm themselves with protection and in most cases weapons are used offensively instead of defensively.'' He added that a sentence below three years is normally handed down when there are unusually strong mitigating factors. Other than that the range is three to five years and five to eight in cases with aggravating factors.

"The sentence imposed here was six months, a sentence that would have fallen under unusually strong mitigating factors, to which there were none in this case.

"The wounds inflicted on the victim were not threatening, but still very serious. Will the six-month sentence operate as a degree of deterrence, he questioned?'' However, Mr. Kim White, also for the defence, said: "The Crown must show that the sentence is `manifestly inadequate'.

"It was clear, according to Pathologist Dr. John Winwick's report, that there was not a lot of force needed to cause the wound, and it was not life threatening or near life threatening.

"And it is clear that this case does not fall to the serious end of cases of the sort. Self-defence was clearly present and Forbes was clearly threatened.'' Mr. White also said Derrick Seymour confronted Forbes and swung at him with his helmet, and Forbes was concerned for the safety of his girlfriend Carol Hollis. Forbes also knew that Seymour had used physical force on Hollis before.

"In all the circumstances of this case, the sentence passed was appropriate and it was for the Crown to show that it was manifestly inadequate, not simply inadequate,'' he said.

"And the court does have the power to consider suspending it.''