BASSETERRE, St. Kitts - VERNLYN ZAKERS today (Mar. 12) walked out of the Basseterre High Court, where the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court of Appeal is currently sitting, shedding tears but completely free of the gun-related convictions previously bestowed upon her.
Zakers on July 22, 2009 was convicted of possession of ammunition, possession of firearms, importation of firearms and importation of ammunition and was sentenced to 26 years imprisonment scheduled to run concurrently.
She was represented in the Court of Appeal by Senior Counsels Dr. Henry Browne and Hesketh Benjamin while the prosecution team was lead by Crown Counsel Garth Wilkin with the Court of Appeal being headed by Chief Justice His Lordship Hugh Rawlins.
According to Dr. Browne, the grounds for appeal crafted by Zakers are as follows:
1. The verdict cannot be sustained having regard to the evidence; and
2. The learned trial judge erred in law when he refused to uphold the 'no case submission' when the evidence did not satisfy the requirements of importation and/or possession in law.
Dr. Browne argued his client's case intensely and brought to light a number of errors the trial judge, Justice Francis Belle, made that may have mislead and confused the jury and caused them to deliver the verdict they gave.
Dr. Browne, after giving details of the case and conviction, argued that the trial judge made errors while delivering the summation of the case; and in doing so misguided the jury.
He also argued that the prosecution did not have enough evidence to prove that his client possessed the mens rea (guilty mind) and that their case was built upon circumstantial evidence of which they did not prove anything.
Dr. Browne disputed that the trial judge's summation of the case had to be taken into consideration, and he pinpointed errors in what the judge said.
He argued that the trial judge failed to filter the evidence and therefore left it up to the jury to decide what evidence was relevant and what was not.
He also argued that the trial judge, in his summation, told the jury at one point that mens rea was required and then later said it may not be so.
Dr. Browne further disputed that the trial judge "expressed thoughts with insufficiency", noting that he isolated Zakers’ evidence.
"The trial judge was prejudicial to her (Zakers) by saying that she gave evidence on her behalf and basically tried to refute some of the things that the customs officer said,” he said.
He further argued that the trial judge confused the jury concerning control and possession, and noted that one could not have possession of something if one did not have control of it.
The Senior Counsel said that even though Zakers had custody of the firearm and ammunition she did not have control of them, which meant that she did not possess them.
He further stated that she did not have control of them because she could not leave the customs port without permission to do so.
Crown Counsel Wilkin argued that Dr. Browne was only picking out parts of the summation and "when one looks at the summation in its entirety, one would see that the trial judge did not mislead the jury".
He also argued that the evidence given was enough for the jury to understand and make a clear decision.
Chief Justice Rawlins agreed that the evidence was there but said it was not much.
"The evidence is not overwhelming, but it is there."
He also agreed with Dr. Browne that the way in which the trial judge carried out his summation may have misled the jury, noting that "his summation in the case was confusing".
"What the judge was suppose to do was distill the evidence and guide the jury on what evidence they should rely on in determining innocence or guilt. But the judge left all evidence up to the jury, which was a grave error.
"It is clear that this direction is so bad. The direction must be so clear and so guided that the jury knows exactly what is required of them."
He further said that one could not be sure the jury understood what was being said in the summation of the case.
Chief Justice Rawlins went on to state that considering the amount of time Zakers had already served and the fact that the evidence against her was not overwhelming, he would not order a retrial but instead set her free.
He said that even though the grounds for appeal was not enough to be granted, the court could not overlook the fact that the trial judge in summarising the case made crucial errors.
Before setting Zakers free, the Chief Justice said, "I am certain that this episode has taught you a lesson. I am certain that it was not a good sound hearing the clang of the gate behind you, and I am certain you do not want to hear them again...You can go."
With that said, Zakers wasted no time in exiting the courtroom with tears flowing non-stop.
SKNVibes requested a statement from Zakers but was denied.
The mother of two was convicted for the gun-related offenses after the prosecution successfully proved that on June 12, 2008 she went to the Robert L. Bradshaw International Airport to clear three packages that contained two bicycles and an inflatable pool, as well as six firearms and 400 rounds of assorted ammunition.
The jury heard evidence from 11 prosecution witnesses and also from Zakers, and just 10 minutes shy of two hours into deliberations had returned an unanimous verdict on all four counts.
The Court of Appeal continues tomorrow.
