Deon Watson (Appellant) v The King (Respondent) (Bahamas)

Hearing listed

Case summary
Appeal

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2023/0048

Jurisdiction

Bahamas

Parties

Appellant(s)

Deon Antonio Watson

Respondent(s)

The King

Issue

Having found the appellant guilty of damage and possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life, but having acquitted him of armed robbery, had the jury been misdirected by the judge and did they deliver inconsistent verdicts as a result? If so, is the appellant’s conviction unsafe?

Facts

On 31 May 2012, Scotia Bank was robbed by two men armed with shotguns. The men discharged shots within the bank during the robbery, which caused damage to the building. The appellant was arrested along with another and was charged, and subsequently convicted, of three counts of possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life (for which he received a sentence of 15 years) and one count of damage (for which he received a sentence of five years, to run concurrently with the 15-year sentence). The appellant was acquitted of two counts of armed robbery. At trial, the judge directed the jury to consider each charge and the evidence against each defendant separately. The appellant argued before the Bahamas Court of Appeal that his conviction was unsafe because the trial judge erred in law in failing to direct the jury that, if they were to acquit the appellant of the counts of armed robbery, it followed that they had to acquit him of the other counts against him. The Bahamas Court of Appeal did not consider the appellant’s conviction to be unsafe and dismissed his appeal. The appellant now appeals to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.