Callwood v R

• Jurisdiction: British Virgin Islands
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Virgin Islands)
• Judge: Cecil Lewis, J.A.
• Judgment Date: 29 June 1967
• Neutral Citation: VG 1967 CA 4
• Docket Number: Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 1966
• Date: 29 June 1967

West Indies Associated States Supreme Court. Court of Appeal

Hon. C.J., Gordon, J.A., Lewis, J.A.

Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 1966

Callwood

and

R

Adams for the Appellant

The Attorney General ( L. Barker) for the Respondent

Criminal Law - Murder

Cecil Lewis, J.A.

1 The appellant was convicted and sentenced to death on November 30, 1966, of the murder of Roy Coakley which took place at Jost Van Dyke in the Virgin Islands on September 3, 1966.

2 On the latter date the appellant who lived and worked in St. John's in the United States Virgin Islands arrived at about 6.00 p.m. at Great Harbour in Jost Van Dyke in a small boat accompanied by a Puerto Rican friend named Leno 0'Keno. He was granted entrance and clearance for his boat by Albert Chinnery, the Customs Officer at Jost Van Dyke. About an hour later a boat from East End also arrived at Great Harbour. In this boat were the deceased, his brother Abraham Coakley, and other men who were natives of East End. When these men landed at wharf, they met the appellant entering the wharf attired only in a pair of bathing trunks. Abraham Coakley went to Fox's Tamarind Bar which is owned by one Philciano Callwood where he stayed far about ten minutes. He then left and was on his way back to the wharf when he met the appellant by the customs building. The appellant walked up to Abraham Coakley held him by his right hand and put his own right hand to the right side of his bathing trunks as if he were trying to get something.

3 Abraham Coakley pulled away his hand from the appellant and walked towards Joe Callwood's bar on the eastern side of the wharf where he stayed for a little while. The significance of the appellant's action in putting his hand to the right side of the bathing trunks will later appear.

4 After Albert Chinnery had given the appellant permission to enter his boat at Great Harbour this witness returned to the customs building on the other side of the road opposite the wharf. While he was at the back of the customs building at about 7.30 p.m. he heard a great noise “like two people fighting”. He went to the scene of the disturbance and there he saw the appellant holding down one Carlton Hendricks on the ground near the sea shore and biting him on the back of his neck. He pulled away the appellant from Hendricks, and with him went to Fox's Tamarind Bar. The appellant in the meantime went off in some direction unknown to Albert Chinnery.

5 The next incident in which the appellant is reported to have been concerned occurs in the evidence of Ivan Chinnery. He was in Fox's bar earlier in the evening. He left at about 7.30 p.m. walking in the direction of the wharf, and met the appellant on the road opposite the wharf. The appellant called out to him “Hey, Cherry, you are one too?” The witness Ivan Chinnery who is known as Cherry, replied and said “One doing what”. The appellant then said “are you one looking to fight me too?” and, on receiving a reply from Ivan Chinnery “not looking for any fight with anybody”. The appellant pulled a diving knife from behind his back, showed it to Ivan Chinnery and said “you see this, I am going to kill one of the boys from East End tonight”. Ivan Chinnery turned back and was on his way to Fox's bar when he met Roy Coakley speaking to Antonio Martin. He spoke to Roy Coakley, then continued on his way to the Tamarind Bar, which he entered and there he remained. Sometime afterwards while he was still in the bar, Roy Coakley entered the bar and he noticed that there was a cut in the palm of one of his hands. This cut had been inflicted by the appellant in circumstances which will later be mentioned.

6 Wayson Hatchett, the gate of whose house is about 24 feet west of the wharf, was standing at his gate that evening when he saw Roy Coakley walking in the direction of the wharf, At the same time he saw the appellant walking from the direction of the wharf. Roy Coakley and the appellant met in the road in front of Wayson Hatchett's gate. Wayson Hatchett saw the appellant hold Roy Coakley by his collar and he heard when he asked him where he was from. Coakley replied “I am from the East”, and he also heard him tell the appellant “let me go, I have not done you anything”. The appellant however continued to hold Roy Coakley. When Roy Coakley stated that he was from the East End the appellant took a knife from the side of his bathing suit (which was the only garment he was then wearing, and made a stab at Roy Coakley with it. Roy Coakley attempted to hold the knife, and the appellant at the same time pulled the knife and so inflicted a cut on the palm of one of Roy Coakley's hands. While the appellant was making the stab at Roy Coakley he was holding Roy Coakley with his other hand. The appellant's friend Leno 0'Keno who was in the vicinity, came running from the direction of the wharf, and held the appellant by his shoulders, thus enabling Roy Coakley to escape from the appellant's grasp. When Coakley escaped from the appellant he told him that he would knock him down, and according to the evidence of Wayson Hatchets, he attempted to fling some stones at the appellant, but every such attempt was frustrated because the appellant's friend, Leno 0'Keno, interposed his body between Roy Coakley and the appellant. Roy Coakley however, even though 0'Keno was between himself and the appellant, nevertheless did not consider himself to be safe for he continued to walk backwards for some time facing the appellant. After a short while he turned his back on the appellant and entered Fox's Tamarind Bar. The appellant and Leno 0'Keno also entered the bar behind Roy Coakley.

7 Wayson Hatchets left his position at his gate and went to a barbed wire fence in one Miss Sandrine's yard. This fence separates Miss Sandrine's premises from Fox's bar. Through this fence he peeped into the bar, but could not see either the appellant or Roy Coakley. However, shortly afterwards he saw Roy Coakley come out of the bar with his head bent downwards, and holding his stomach, and he observed when he fell down at the side of the road some 19 feet or so from the bar. At the same time he noticed that all the persons who were in the bar came running outside.

8 An account of the incident which took place in the bar was given by Albert Chinnery, the Customs Officer. He, it will be remembered, had entered the bar with Carlton Hendricks, and was there when Roy Coakley came in. Coakley entered and stood against a big table under a shed in the bar. Albert Chinnery saw when the appellant entered and went up to Roy Coakley who was leaning on the table with his back towards the appellant. The appellant put his arm around Coakley from behind, held him by the front of his shirt, turned him around to face him and hit Roy Coakley two blows on the head with his fist. The appellant then pulled a knife from the waist of his bathing trunks with his right hand and stabbed Roy Coakley on his left side with the knife, and, in the graphic words of this witness, “he saw blood running from the deceased like a river.” After the appellant had stabbed Roy Coakley, he went towards Ian Chinnery and made a violent stab at him in the region, of stomach, Ivan Chinnery jumped backwards, and the knife hit his belt, almost cutting it in two. Ivan Chinnery then picked up a piece of steel which was lying on a chair nearby and struck the accused with it on his head, knocking him to the ground and while he was on the ground he was disarmed. After the appellant got up he left the bar and went outside walking in an easterly direction. About 15 to 20 minutes after stabbing Roy Coakley the appellant was seen on the wharf by Philiciano Callwood and he asked Callwood to take him to St. John. Callwood, not surprisingly, refused and told the appellant that he was busy.

9 In the meantime, the wounded man, Roy Coakley, was found to be dead when he was examined by his brother, Abraham Coakley.

10 A report of the incident was made to the Road Town police station in Tortola at about 9.00 p.m. and a police launch arrived at Great Harbour at about 11.00 p.m. The policemen took possession of the body of the deceased, and took the appellant whom they met on the wharf into custody. On their way back to Tortola, the appellant was arrested and charged with the murder of the deceased and after he had been cautioned, he was told that a written record would be made of any statement he might make, and he said it was alright. When the police the police launch arrived at Tortola the appellant was taken to Peebles Hospital where he was treated for lacerations on the left side of his scalp and bruises on his left shoulder and left side of the body. He was then taken to the police station, again charged and cautioned, and at his request, a statement which he indicated he would make to the police was written down by Randolph George. The appellant's statement to the police...