The Director of Public Prosecutions v Franklyn Edgecombe aka “Chili”

• Jurisdiction: Bahamas
• Judge: Williams J
• Judgment Date: 27 June 2023
• Docket Number: cri/vbi/24/1/2019
• Court: Supreme Court (Bahamas)

The Director of Public Prosecutions

and

Franklyn Edgecombe aka “Chili”

Before:

The Honourable Mr. Justice Franklyn K M Williams KC

cri/vbi/24/1/2019

COMMONWEALTH OF THE BAHAMAS

IN THE SUPREME COURT

Criminal Division

Murder — Deceased witness — Witness statement identifying accused — S. 66 Evidence Act — Hearsay Evidence — Whether a statement made to police is a document which is a part or forms a part of a record compiled by a person acting under a duty — Judicial Discretion

On the 11^th December 2018 Rico Archer was killed at North Street, Fort Fincastle. The defendant is charged with the murder of Rico Archer. A jury trial commenced on 26^th June 2023.

The prosecution have applied pursuant to the section 66(1) and (2) (a) (i) of the Evidence Act to have the statement of a deceased identifying witness Valentino Williams admitted into evidence. The defence are opposed and submit the statement is more prejudicial than probative.

Elshadae Ferguson v Regina SCCrApp No. 4 of 2016

considered

Giovanni Ivan Clarke v Regina SCCrApp No. 156 of 2017 applied

Appearances:

Timothy Bailey with him Tamika Roberts for the Director of Public Prosecutions

Ms. Marianne Cadet for Edgecombe

RULING

Williams J

1. Section 66(1) of the Evidence Act provides:

“66(1) Subject to section 67 a statement in a document shall be admissible in any criminal proceedings as evidence of any fact stated therein of which direct oral evidence would be admissible if–

• (a) The document is or forms part of a record compiled by a person acting under a duty from information supplied by a person (whether acting under a duty or not) who had, or may reasonably be supposed to have had, personal knowledge of the matters dealt with in that information;

  and

• (b) any condition relating to the person who supplied the person who supplied the information which is specified in subsection (2) is satisfied.

(2) The conditions mentioned in paragraph (b) of subsection

• (1) are –

• (a) that the person who supplied the information –

  • (1) is dead or by reason of his bodily or mental condition unfit to attend as a witness,…”

2. The death of Valentino Williams has been proved with the handing over of the original of his death certificate, the fact of which has not been contested by the defence.

3. A statement given to a police officer during the course of an investigation falls within section 66 (1) (a). The statement of Valentino Williams was taken by Sergeant Raphael Miller on 15 December 2018 during the course of the investigation into the murder of Rico Archer. Per the contents of the statement, Williams had personal or direct knowledge of the facts referred to.

4. Mr. Bailey for the Director of Public Prosecutions (“the DPP”) referred the Court to section 258 (11) of the Criminal Procedure Code:

“Every statement purporting to be the evidence of a witness admitted under this subsection shall be deemed a deposition taken in accordance with the provisions of the Evidence Act relating to the...