TNAG-0604-FCO40-752-Capital-punishment-in-Dependent-Territories-1977 — Page 46

4-

み

GROUNDS

OF APPEAL

The Learned Trial Judge in Error:

1. Failed properly to appreciate and/or to consider

(a) That the Territory of Tortola does not have a Common Law for

itself in its Criminal Jurisdiction and therefore the Indictment

was Bad in Law and should be quashed, there being no definition

in Law of what CONSTITUTES the offence of Murder.

(b) That the Common Law Definition of Murder cannot be imported in

this Territory unless Legislated for by imperial or local

enactments: There being no such enactments, the appellant was strongly convicted in violation of the Rules of Natural Justice,

2. Failed properly to appreciate and/or order that the Jury should be

kept together and not seperated as prescribed by the Law of this Territory whereby the Appeliant suffered a grave and serious mis.. carriage of justice, there being a reasonable inference that the Jury's Verdict was so influenced.

3* As regards the Defences of Insanity, Automatism, Diminished respon--

sibility, the learned trial judge fell into error and wrongfully

usurped the fuction of the jury by making material findings of fact on the Mental Condition of the Accused, as follows to wit:-

4.

(a) " That the accused is no idiot,

(b)

11 The Accused is a reasonable man,

#1

In Effect, the learned trial judge had wrongfully withdrawn from

the jury defences of Insanity, Automatism, and Diminished respon- sibility, whereby the accused suffered a serious and grave mis-

carriage of justice.

As regards the defences of Insanity and Automatism the learned trial judge erred in law in directing the jury that the proof required to establish the defence of Insanity is the same as is required to establish the defence of Automatism.