Williams v. The State (Trinidad and Tobago)

Williams v. The State (Trinidad and Tobago) [2005] UKPC 11 (15 March 2005)

Privy Council Appeal No. 55 of 2004

Earl Williams Appellant

The State Respondent

FROM

THE COURT OF APPEAL OF

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

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

REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE LORDS OF THE

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL, OF THE

26th January 2005, Delivered the 15th March 2005

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

Present at the hearing:-

Lord Bingham of Cornhill

Lord Hoffmann

Lord Scott of Foscote

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Lord Carswell

[Delivered by Lord Carswell]

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

On 18 July 1988 the appellant, a police officer in Trinidad, was convicted after a trial before Brooks J and a jury of raping a woman who had on the night of 16 July 1984 come to La Brea police station, where the appellant was on duty. He was sentenced to 25 years' imprisonment at hard labour, 20 strokes of the birch and to be kept in solitary confinement for one month during the first year of his imprisonment. His earliest date of release would be 17 March 2005, were it not for the fact that the Court of Appeal increased the sentence of imprisonment to one of 30 years. The appellant has appealed by special leave to the Board against the validity of that part of the order of the Court of Appeal which increased his sentence. At the conclusion of the hearing the Board announced that the appeal would be allowed and that part of the order of the Court of Appeal quashed, with reasons to be given at a future date. This judgment now contains the reasons of the Board.

The appellant on 27 July 1988 applied to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence. The applications were heard by the court (Bernard CJ, Hamel-Smith and Gopeesingh JJA) in June/July 1992, but judgment was not given until 20 May 1994. The written judgment of the court, delivered by Bernard CJ, dealt in detail with the conviction and the appellant's grounds of appeal, all of which were rejected.

The Chief Justice then turned to the issue of the sentence imposed. He stated at page 167 of the record:

"With regard to ground 8, the contention here was that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The argument, however, was not advanced with any semblance of conviction, and, in the Court's opinion not unexpectedly."

He set out the judge's sentencing remarks, in which he emphasised the seriousness of the offence committed by a police officer on duty in a police station against a young woman who had come to the station "seeking protection and in pursuit of her rights". The Chief Justice said that the court entirely endorsed the judge's remarks and went on:

"There are no mitigating circumstances in this case whatsoever. In fact the offence is one which calls for a penalty that would reflect society's utter abhorrence at this invasion upon its confidence and trust.

Leave to appeal against conviction is refused. With regard…

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

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established