Paria v. The State (Trinidad and Tobago)

Case [2003] UKPC 36


    ADVANCE COPY

    Privy Council Appeal No. 42 of 2002

    Bimal Roy Paria Appellant

    v.

    The State Respondent

    FROM

    THE COURT OF APPEAL OF
    TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

    ---------------

    JUDGMENT OF THE LORDS OF THE JUDICIAL

    COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL,

    Delivered the 15th April 2003

    ------------------

    Present at the hearing:-

    Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead

    Lord Hutton
    Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough
    Lord Scott of Foscote
    Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

    [Delivered by Lord Rodger of Earlsferry]

    ------------------

  1. On 24 July 1998 in St Joseph the appellant repeatedly beat three women about the head with a piece of wood. Two of them died that day and the third died a month later. On 19 July 2000 at Port of Spain High Court, after a trial before Archie J and a jury, the appellant was convicted of the murders of the three women and sentenced to death. On 30 January 2001 the Court of Appeal dismissed his application for leave to appeal against his convictions and sentences. He now appeals to the Board, by special leave, against his convictions. He also appeals against the mandatory sentences of death imposed upon him on the ground that they infringe his constitutional rights.
  2. The judgment of the Court of Appeal contains a helpful summary of the facts on which their Lordships base much of the following narrative.
  3. Prior to the offences the appellant had been in a common law relationship with Asha Arjoon, by whom he had two children, a girl aged 4 and a boy of 18 months. The couple had lived together for some 6 years before eventually separating. In July 1998 Asha and the children were living with her mother, Sita Arjoon, while the appellant was living not far away with his father. On about 21 July there was a meeting between Asha and her parents, on the one side, and the appellant on the other, for the purpose of resolving the differences that had arisen between them. It appears that, although some of the issues were resolved, others were not.
  4. The State does not dispute that at that time the appellant's father was suffering from cancer. According to the appellant, on the evening of 24 July he saw and spoke to his father at his mother's house. In his evidence as noted by the judge, the appellant said:
  5. "He was not looking good at all. I knew he had cancer. I was depressed about that. As a result of the conversation with my father, I was going to arrange for the children to come and spend the night with me and my father. This was at my father's request. He was sick and he wanted to see them."

    The appellant said that as a result of this conversation he went to the home of Sita Arjoon where the children were. He collected his daughter and took her to see his father. He then went back to drop off his daughter at Sita Arjoon's house and to say that he would call back later…

Continue reading Paria v. The State (Trinidad and Tobago)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
Case
[2003] UKPC 36
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

AI summary not yet generated for this case.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.