A crowded court room fell silent yesterday as the man found guilty of shooting another man four times in a Hamilton nightclub was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

Charles Richardson, 24, of Harrington Sound Road, Smith's Parish lowered his head and held his hands tightly behind his back as the sentence was read.

Richardson received ten years imprisonment for using a firearm to commit an indictable act and was also sentenced to four years imprisonment for unlawful wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, two years for unlawful wounding and five years for possession of a prohibited weapon. The latter three sentences are to run concurrently.

Richardson was found guilty of the four charges by a Supreme Court jury on October 5 but was found not guilty of attempted murder.

Crown Counsel Ms Charlene Scott told the court that, by law, the sentence for using a firearm had to run consecutively to the other sentences which could run concurrently.

She added that by law the minimum sentence for possession of a firearm was five years imprisonment while the minimum sentence for use of a firearm was ten years.

Richardson's lawyer Mr. Mark Pettingill asked Puisne Judge, the Hon. Mr.

Justice Meerabux to be merciful and to take note of circumstances involved in the matter before sentencing.

Mr. Pettingill said one thing was established by the testimony of the Crown's witnesses: "Mr. Richardson was attacked by a gang of youths that go by the name of `the white wall crew'.

"That group of individuals can be considered as a criminal element.'' The offence was serious, but he said he did not think "it was for us to be silly about it with sentences that approach the draconian''.

And he argued that "on the basis of the Chief Justice's comments, we are attempting to get people out of prison to reform them, not to lock everybody up and throw away the key''.

After the trial Mr. Pettingill said: "I find it unfortunate in all of the circumstances of this case, and the clear and equivocal facts that were before the court,that a young man -- because of the statutory restrictions placed on a judge in regard to sentencing -- is sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.'' He said he had to speak to his client before announcing whether or not he would be appealing the conviction or the sentence.