Popular imprisoned dancehall artiste Adidja Palmer, better known as Vybz Kartel, and his co-convicts: Shawn Campbell, or Shaw Storm; Kahira Jones; and Andre St John, will know their destiny on March 14th, when the Privy Council in the United Kingdom, the highest court of appeal for Jamaica and many Commonwealth countries, hands down its judgment in their murder appeal case.
The focus of this appeal is on evaluating the trial process for its legal soundness rather than rehashing the details of the crime for the murder of Clive “Lizard” Williams ten years ago.
The issue in the appeal is whether their convictions are safe in light of the following grounds of challenge:
- Should the trial judge have excluded the telecommunications evidence relied on by the prosecution?
- How should the judge have handled the allegations that there were attempts to bribe members of the jury during the trial? Should the jury have been discharged?
- Was the judge wrong to invite the jury to reach a verdict late in the day, given the special circumstances of the case?
Regarding telecommunications evidence
During the trial in 2014, the appellants challenged the admissibility of phone evidence, arguing that its acquisition violated the Interception of Communications Act and infringed upon the fundamental right to privacy of communication as guaranteed by the Jamaican Constitution. Vybz Kartel’s lawyers also stated that the evidence was contaminated, as police had used the phone’s data. Justice Lennox Campbell, who presided over the trial, also admitted that the phone evidence was compromised, but deemed the telecommunications evidence admissible.
During the appeal, the defense argued that its inclusion may have been legally flawed and affirmed that the evidence was obtained in violation of local laws. They sought to establish a precedent for handling unlawfully obtained telecommunications evidence.
The Privy Council panel had the opportunity to examine whether the phone evidence was central to the conviction and whether the conviction would still have been reached without it.
Issue of jury tampering
Additionally, jury tampering emerged as a major point of concern during the appeal.
During the 64-day trial, the judge was alerted to an allegation that a juror had attempted to bribe others by offering $500,000 JMD for a specific verdict. After investigating the allegation and consulting with counsel for both the prosecution and defense, the judge opted to continue the trial without dismissing the jury or the implicated juror. The juror was later found guilty.
Questions were raised about the trial judge’s handling of the bribery issue and whether enough attention was given to mitigate any potential prejudice. Thus, the panel must determine whether the interference has compromised the entire jury’s impartiality and rendered the conviction unjustifiable.
Arguments have also revolved around whether dismissing the entire jury upon discovering the bribery was warranted and the impact of such a decision on the trial’s integrity.
Is a fair trial possible for Vybz Kartel?
In the event of convictions being overturned, the prosecution expressed its desire for a retrial, emphasizing the importance of considering the decisions made by the Jamaican Court of Appeal, which is most familiar with the Jamaican legal system.
But the appellants’ lawyers countered the notion of a retrial, asserting that the passage of time and the high-profile nature of the case have made a fair trial unfeasible.
To free “World Boss” or not? That’s the question.
