Judge criticised by defence
trial of two men found guilty of murder.
Teiko Furbert and Sheldon Franks were sentenced to life imprisonment in April following the shooting of James Cyrus Caines last year.
But at an appeal hearing yesterday lawyers for both men claimed the judge at the original trial had made a series of crucial errors.
Representing Furbert Queen's Counsellor John Perry claimed Puisne Judge Richard Ground should not have allowed some prosecution evidence to be deemed admissible at the original trial.
Mr. Perry claimed that when the dead man's mother gave evidence, she claimed that Furbert had told her he had accused Mr. Caines of stealing some packages from him.
"That evidence was completely irrelevant,'' Mr. Perry said.
"The judge in his direction to the jury said that it was relevant to the motive for Furbert embarking on what he did that night. He was inviting the jury to speculate.'' Mr. Perry argued that, although Furbert said he had accused Mr. Caines of stealing from him, he did not say when that had occurred.
Mr. Perry also said that a conversation between his client and a Police detective just before Furbert was about to be formally charged should not have been made admissible.
"Once he has been charged you should not be asking questions unless it's under special circumstances,'' he said.
"This is a borderline case in which evidence was submitted that was inadmissible.'' Mr. Perry also said that Judge Ground was wrong to direct the jury to try for a majority verdict if they could not reach a unanimous decision within an hour.
He claimed that the two men should have been treated separately and therefore the jury should have spent an hour on each defendant. Both men were convicted on majority verdicts.
Mark Pettingill, representing Franks, also criticised Puisne Judge Ground.
He said that a statement made by the dying Mr. Caines claiming that he had been shot by Franks should also not have been made admissible.
"The point is that, even if the judge went as far as to accept that the dying declaration was admissible it was impossible for this man to see who fired the shot,'' he said.
The case continues today.