4
12. The petitioner admitted, in evidence, that he brought
the hammer to the office in his brief case but claimed that
the deceased asked him to get a hammer for the office, so as to repair stud buttons on sample garments.
13. The jury were fully directed on each of the defences, and obviously rejected each of them.
PRINCIPAL FACTORS
14.
The deceased suffered multiple injuries as described in paragraph 5 above whilst the petitioner suffered a minor bruise to the forehead which could have been caused by a
hammer blow.
15. The jury obviously rejected the claim that the deceased provoked the petitioner in the legal sense. However it may be that there was some provocation which fell short of the legal concept.
MITIGATING FACTORS
16. The petitioner has no previous convictions.
17. The murder may not have been premeditated.
RECOMMENDATION
18. If His Excellency the Governor decides to commute the death sentence I recommend that a sentence of 20 years be
substituted.