BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – AFTER the procedural integrity of a murder trial conducted at the Basseterre High Court of Justice was put under the spotlight at the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (ECSC) Court of Appeal, a young man, who was convicted, was freed after the decision was overturned.

At the respective ages of 15 and 19 years, Deshorne Nisbett and Jamella Wilson were remanded to Her Majesty’s Prison for allegedly committing the murder of Kerris ‘Sonny’ Dorset of Tabernacle Village.

In March 2005, the duo was tried and a 12-member jury unanimously convicted them of the May 4, 2003 offence.

After being behind bars for approximately five years, both Nisbett and Wilson appeared before the Court of Appeal this week, where they forwarded appeals against the conviction and sentence handed down at the Basseterre High Court of Justice.

Dr. Browne’s argument to the Justices of Appeal was that the prosecution failed to call one of its witnesses whose name was “written on the back of the deposition”, which robbed the defence of the opportunity to cross-examine him. He further argued that the trial judge’s decision not to exercise his discretion to have the witness called, thereby making him available to the defence, constitutes a “material irregularity in the trial”.

The appellant’s counsel accepted that the jury was exposed to the issue of “self-defence” and was given the opportunity to weight that evidence against the prosecution’s evidence. He challenged however, that evidence coming from the witness who was not called would have afforded the jury the opportunity to deliberate on the possibility that Nisbett and Wilson were provoked into acting as they did. If this were done, Browne explained, there is a very strong possibility that the jury would have returned a different verdict.

Nisbett and Wilson were sentenced to life imprisonment and, in presenting his argument against sentence, Dr. Browne opined that to condemn them each for life suggests that they are beyond rehabilitation.

“The sentence screams for adjustment downward…,” Dr. Browne said.

He suggested that Nisbett is a fitting candidate for a “second change”, so much so that time served should be the extent of his sentence.

The respondent, Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), conceded that the issue of provocation should have been allowed to put to the jury and that it may have affected the verdict.

Having been satisfied that this is indeed the case, the Justices of Appeal allowed the appeals and commuted the murder convictions to manslaughter.

The appeals against sentence were also allowed and in the case of Wilson, the sentence was changed from life imprisonment to 15 years while in Nisbett’s case, his sentence was changed to “time served” plus a two-year suspended sentence.