Robinson v R. (Bermuda)

Case [2011] UKPC 3


    [2011] UKPC 3
    Privy Council Appeal No 0104 of 2009

    JUDGMENT

    Denis Alma Robinson v The Queen
    From the Court of Appeal of Bermuda
    before
    Lady Hale
    Lord Mance
    Lord Kerr
    Lord Dyson
    Sir Anthony Hughes
    JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY
    Sir Anthony Hughes
    ON

    9 February 2011

    Heard on 15 December 2010
    Appellant
    John Perry QC
    Craig Attridge
    (Instructed by Simons Muirhead & Burton)
      Respondent
    Rory Field
    Howard Stevens
    Cindy Clarke
    (Instructed by Charles Russell LLP)
    SIR ANTHONY HUGHES:
  1. The appellant Robinson was one of two defendants convicted on 2 February 2006 before the Chief Justice of Bermuda and a jury of the murder of two twin brothers. The Crown case against him was that he had aided the other man, Burgess, to commit the offence. It was not the Crown case that Robinson had himself used any force upon either of the victims. Robinson's appeal against his conviction was dismissed by the Court of Appeal for Bermuda. He appeals to Her Majesty on grounds essentially the same as those advanced before the Court of Appeal. The principal grounds require the Board to examine the basis on which the Crown presented its case against Robinson, and the directions which the Chief Justice gave to the jury on the critical issue of guilt as a secondary party aiding the principal offender. If the conviction is upheld, there is also a limited appeal against sentence under which the Board is invited by the appellant to remit the matter to the court below with a direction that it be further remitted to the trial judge; on this sentence issue the parties are agreed that that is the appropriate order.
  2. Burgess owned and operated a gambling den in Elliot Street, Hamilton. Robinson was a longstanding friend of his and had been since they had been at college together overseas ten or more years previously. The two deceased were twin brothers, called Jahmal and Jahmil Cooper. It was common ground that there had been a grievance, at any rate in the past, between Burgess and the twins, one or both of whom he accused of having robbed his father. Sometime around 0300 in the early hours of the morning of Saturday/Sunday 12/13 March 2005 the twins visited Elliot St. They left and rejoined a friend, Cann, in the street outside. They were shortly joined by Burgess and Robinson. Also present, although not necessarily arriving together, were three others, called Whitter ("Vat Vap"), Schraders ("Popeye") and Bartrum ("Springer"). It was the intention of the twins to go to a club called the "Ambassadors". Burgess and Robinson said that they would go too, and all 7 set off in Burgess' car and Robinson's van. Burgess, however, drove away from the club and to a house to which he had access in a different part of town. Robinson, carrying with him Cann and one of the twins, also drove there. Everyone got out of the vehicles. There was evidence, if the jury accepted it, that Burgess and Robinson then…

Continue reading Robinson v R. (Bermuda)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
Case
[2011] UKPC 3
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.