No discount

The Court of Appeal has upheld the life sentence for a man convicted of murdering two children in St James in 2014, rejecting his claim that he should receive a lighter sentence for pleading guilty.

The court ruled that the trial judge acted within discretion when she said that if she had, applying a discount over the guilty plea “would shock the public conscience”.

The majority decision was handed down on October 3, following hearings in 2023 and 2024. Justice Nicole Foster-Pusey disagreed with her fellow justices Frank Williams, who wrote the opinion, and Evan Brown.

The case stemmed from Jason Gray’s conviction and subsequent life sentence on two counts of murder, to which he had pleaded guilty in March 2020.

On June 26, 2020, the sentencing judge imposed a life sentence with a stipulation that Gray serve 29 years before becoming eligible for parole. Gray appealed against the sentence, primarily contending that the trial judge erred by refusing to grant a discount for his guilty plea and that the 29-year pre-parole period was “manifestly excessive”.

Gray had lured Omari Sterling and Maleeka Mitchell from One Man Beach in St James on July 13, 2014, telling them he was taking them to a Burger King restaurant. Their bodies were found two days later in fishing ponds in Trelawny.

CAUSE OF DEATH

Omari died from a stab wound and Maleeka from asphyxiation, the court was told. Evidence included CCTV footage and his sale of Omari’s phone, alongside his own caution statement implicating himself and another man, Kemar.

Gray appealed, arguing that the pre-parole period was excessive and that his guilty plea warranted a sentence reduction. His attorney Leroy Equiano submitted that mitigating factors, including Gray’s remorse and industrious character, should have reduced the pre-parole period to 16 and a half years for count one and 21 years for count two.

The prosecution countered that the severity of the crimes, the age and vulnerability of the children, and the premeditated violence justified the original sentence. A prosecutor noted that a guilty plea “does not diminish the fact of death and thus, the appellant should not enjoy the benefit that a guilty plea might ordinarily avail a convict”.

In its majority decision, the Court of Appeal found that the sentencing judge correctly applied the relevant statutory and common law principles. The majority concluded that the refusal to grant a discount for the guilty plea was justified by the severity of the offence and the facts of the case.

BASIS OF DECISION

“The learned sentencing judge’s refusal to grant a discount was well within her discretion based on the facts before her,” Justice Williams wrote in the 25-page opinion. “Based on the heinous nature of the murders of the two children, and having regard to the proportionality, totality and parity principles, we are unable to find the pre-parole periods imposed to be manifestly excessive.”

The Court of Appeal said while the trial judge substantially followed sentencing guidelines, she made two technical errors - failing to explain her choice of life sentences and wrongly applying a 30-year deeming provision. However, the panel concluded that “these errors by themselves do not warrant a quashing of the pre-parole periods imposed”.

The 30-year deeming provision referred to a rule under the Criminal Justice (Administration) (Amendment) Act that establishes a benchmark or reference point specifically, that life imprisonment is deemed equivalent to 30 years’ imprisonment only for the purpose of calculating a sentence reduction.

Gray’s appeal was dismissed, leaving him to serve life imprisonment with 29 years before eligibility for parole on both counts.

The prosecution was represented at the appeal by now Director of Public Prosecutions Claudette Thompson, Nickeisha Young Shand, and Kemar Setal.

editorial@gleanerjm.com