The 18 page judgment handed down by the U.K.’s Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) in the Vybz Kartel murder case on March 14, 2024 states that the “Appellants Appeal be Allowed” on the grounds that the the jury tampering affected his constitutional rights. The Privy Council concluded that the convictions should be quashed due to juror misconduct and remitted the case to the Court of Appeal of Jamaica to decide whether to order a retrial of the appellants on the murder of Clive Williams. The Board found the judge’s handling of the juror misconduct to be inadequate, leading to a material irregularity in the trial. They highlighted concerns about the allegedly corrupt juror’s continued presence on the jury and the potential for prejudice against the appellants. The Privy Council did not express a view on other grounds of appeal due to the conclusion on juror misconduct.
Jamaica’s Court Of Appeal will now decide whether there will be a retrial of the case.
Kartel was arrested at a hotel in Jamaica by the Flying Squad and charged with possession of Ganja on September 29, 2011. On October 3 additional charges of murder of Jamaican businessman Barrington Burton, conspiracy to murder and illegal possession of firearm were added while he was locked up. he was denied bail after appearing in court on October 4.
On March 23, 2012 he was finally granted bail in the amount of J$3 million but had to remain in jail due to a second murder charge of Clive ‘Lizard’ Williams.
The trial for the murder of Barrington Burton was postponed on January 21, 2013 due to lack of jurors to July 11. On July 24, 2013 he was found not guilty of the murder of Barrington Burton. He remained in custody for the November 18, 2013 trial for the murder of Clive Williams in the Home Circuit Court in Jamaica.
The appellants, Shawn Campbell, Adidja Palmer a/k/a Vybz Kartel, Kahira Jones, and Andre St John, were convicted of the murder of Clive “Lizard” Williams on 13 March 2014. The prosecution alleged that the murder took place at Kartel’s Havendale house in St. Andrew after Williams failed to return two unlicensed firearms entrusted to him by Palmer. Williams disappeared on 16 August 2011, and his body has never been found.
During the trial, the prosecution relied heavily on telecommunications evidence obtained from the cellular phones of the accused. This evidence, sourced from Digicel, a major telecommunications provider in Jamaica, was contested by the defense, arguing breaches of privacy and procedural irregularities. However, the trial judge deemed the evidence admissible.
Additionally, the trial was marred by allegations of jury tampering. Despite claims that a juror attempted to bribe others, the judge opted to continue the trial without discharging the jury or the implicated juror. The judge’s decision to urge a verdict late in the day, under special circumstances, also came under scrutiny.
Kartel along with his co-accused appealed the case in the Jamaica Court Of Appeal but it was dismissed on April 3, 2020. His parole time was reduced to a mandatory 32 years instead of 35 years.
Key Issues
- Admissibility of Telecommunications Evidence: The defense lead by attorney Isat Buchanan who is the son of dancehall legend Big Youth, real name Manley Buchanan, challenged the admissibility of evidence obtained from the accused’s cellular phones, citing breaches of privacy and procedural errors. The trial judge upheld the admissibility, a decision now subject to review.
- Jury Tampering Allegations: Serious allegations of jury tampering surfaced during the trial, raising questions about the integrity of the proceedings. Despite these allegations, the judge proceeded with the trial without discharging the jury or addressing the issue adequately.
- Handling of Jury Deliberations: The timing and manner in which the judge urged a verdict from the jury have been called into question, particularly considering the gravity of the case and the alleged attempts at jury tampering. The trial judge put undue pressure on jury to return a verdict.
Court Proceedings
The appeal was heard by a distinguished panel of justices, including Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs, Lord Burrows, and Lady Simler. The hearing spanned from 14 February to 15 February 2024, during which the appellants presented their case challenging the safety of their convictions.
Judgment
The landmark 64 points judgment allowing quashing the verdict was delivered on 14 March 2024 (4:00 pm UK time), when the JCPC addressed the pivotal issue raised by the appellants regarding the jury tampering and did not comment on the other issues. However during the appeals the court meticulously evaluated the admissibility of telecommunications evidence, the handling of jury tampering allegations, and the judge’s conduct during jury deliberations.
Implications
The JCPC’s ruling sets a precedent for future cases involving similar legal challenges, particularly regarding the admissibility of telecommunications evidence and the handling of jury tampering allegations. The judgment underscores the importance of upholding procedural fairness while ensuring the integrity of the judicial process.
In the ruling it is stated that “The board has sympathy with the trial judge..however allowing the alleged bribed jury to remain “was an infringement on the appellants constitutional rights.”
