Nixon John of Citronier has escaped a custodial sentence due to a passionate mitigation plea from his attorney and the fact that he pleaded guilty to possession of cannabis and possession with intent to supply 33 grams of the illegal substance.Chief Magistrate Evalina Baptiste told the 42 year-old John that being a first time offender was also a strong mitigating factor in his favour.
John, who resides with his girlfriend, Thelma Bonnie Delma, was arrested by members of the Drugs Squad at the home of Delma in the early hours of April 13, 2013.
The illegal substance was found in a “calabash” and both individuals were arrested but in court, Delma pleaded not guilty to the charges while John pleaded guilty.
The prosecution, led by Sergeant Valda Powell withdrew the charges against Delma.
John’s lawyer, Ronald Charles, told the court that his client was “contrite had pleaded guilty at the first available time, not wasted the courts time and was a first time offender.”
He asked the court to be “merciful” to his client, not to impose a custodial sentence and that whatever fine that was being considered, should not be heavy.
“He has already suffered humiliation at being in the cell over the weekend for two days, he is very sorry for the incident and vowed to correct his actions in the future,” Charles told the court.
Chief Magistrate Baptiste imposed a $900.00 fine for possession of cannabis to be paid by August 21, 2013 and in default, 5 months in jail.
There was no separate penalty for the charge of possession with intent to supply.
Of, from whats the difference, ? The womans husband is from Citronier, the m
an and the woman are not of or from Citronier and the home where police found the ganja belongs to the husband. When you diss
a man in his own home, you goin get diss 900 times more. The question is did the Police come to the house for ganga or for some other reason. This bway too bold face and out of place,read my text, he not from Citron city !!!….
When are those so-called educated lawyers going to cease saying that the criminal “did not waste the Court’s time, pleaded guilty and it is his first time offense?” It is embarrassing and also laughable to read their words.
A crime is a crime, first time or not. I do not even think the magistrate should mention that it is his first time. This is encouragement for so-called first-timers to commit crimes and get away with it. Just sentence him based on the evidence.
What happens when other first time criminals are arrested, come to Court and stand before the Magistrate for sentencing? Since the Court must be fair to all with no exception, what type of sentencing will they receive? Food for thought.
The man needs a good lecture in staying away from drugs which are harmful to his system and that of others and hope he pays heed. Where will he get the $900 to pay the Court? Are he and his girlfriend employed? If he is employed can his income help him to pay that amount?
As for his girlfriend she got away Scot Free. She resides in the home. Surely, she knew about the drugs and was an accomplice in also hiding it as well. Some lawyer, sargeant and some Court system.
Before you make these comments go and read the LAW. It PLAINLY states in the law the anyone charged is ENTITLED to a DISCOUNT in SENTENCE…Once any of the following conditions are satisfied:
1. The plead guilty at the first reasonable opportunity
2. Co-operated with policemen and do not waste the courts time
3. Is a first time offender
They are using the words of the STATUTE.
Geez!
I can understand the first one but the others? It appears to be a joke. This LAW, the Statute is due for a revamp in the 21st century, the year 2013. When last has this been in effect?
Some of you want certain Laws to change. This is one which needs to be changed. It appears to be behind time.
Let us see what sentence a first-time murderer will get. Is it any wonder many who also murder are being bailed out and the day after they commit murder with no regard for the victims and their families? It is as if they do not exist, giving murderers bail and precedence over the victims as if the victims do not exist. Kangaroo Court? This should be taken to a higher court in the Caribbean.
Give me a break! this is an old but effective tool being used by Lawyers from time immorial and it always works. It`s not rocket science, it is what it is we still live in a democracy, give a little take a little and every body goes home happy.
To re-offend. A leopard does not change its color overnight.
We really hope that you are doing ok
Thank God aunty we love you
It was found in a calabash in his home. No offense here.
The prosecution led by who? what kind of law that police seargant study?
To be a sergeant she MUST have done a law course during a her time as an officer. The prosecution is comprised of Police AND Prosecutors!. GET EDUCATED!
The man and his girlfriend are not from Citronier. Don’t give us a bad name.
they never tell u they ‘from’ Citronier..there’s a diff between ‘from’ and ‘of’…
cky
…
the court did not want to waste my time… 
That statement seems to b the way out.