The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (ECSC) has ordered the release of Richardson Fontaine who was serving a ten-year jail sentence for unlawful sexual intercourse with an 11-year-old female.
Fontaine then aged 52, was sentenced on Tuesday 29 September 2015 by Justice Errol Thomas after being found guilty by a nine-member jury.
According to the facts of the case, Fontaine, who was married, was engaged in an extra-marital affair with a woman named Miranda, who is a cousin of the virtual complainant and who lives in the vicinity of the VC’s home.
On 23rd October 2012, the child spent the night at Miranda’s home, where Fontaine had sexual intercourse with her. On the morning of 24th October 2012, she returned to her home and left later that morning to go to school.
After she left for school, her mother noticed what appeared to be blood on the underwear which the child was wearing when she returned from Miranda’s home. Upon her return home from school, her mother questioned her about the blood on her underwear and the child told her what had happened at Miranda’s home.
The mother then went to Miranda’s home to show her the underwear that the child had been wearing when she came home from Miranda’s that morning.
The child was taken to the Health Centre and examined by Miranda who worked as a nurse; a few days later she was taken to the Portsmouth Hospital where she was examined by a medical doctor. A report was then made to the police; investigations were conducted and Fontaine was arrested and charged for unlawful sexual intercourse and indecent assault.
He appealed and advanced 8 grounds of appeal against conviction and one ground of appeal against sentence claiming it was harsh.
Justice of Appeal Mario Michel, who wrote the Court’s decision, stated, “having regard to the fact that what the jury had to do in this case was essentially to determine whether they believed the appellant or the VC, the prejudicing of the jury’s mind against the appellant was at the very least capable of causing a miscarriage of justice, and I cannot say that no miscarriage was in fact caused.”
“Indeed, the fact that the case turned on the very issue of whether or not the jury believed the VC or the appellant, it cannot be said with any certainty that the verdict of the jury would have been the same if their minds had not been prejudiced against the appellant. I will accordingly allow the appeal and quash the conviction of the appellant. The appeal against sentence will fall away as a result,” Michel JA stated.
He continued, “I would dismiss 7 of the 8 grounds of appeal against conviction and uphold 1. The ground upheld (adjusted to reflect its amalgamation with a kindred ground) complained about the trial judge’s several interruptions of defense counsel in her closing address to the jury which had the effect of prejudicing the minds of the jury against the appellant.”
The appellant’s appeal against his conviction should, therefore, be allowed and his conviction and sentence set aside, subject however to section 38(1) of the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (Dominica) Act31 (the Supreme Court Act),” Michel stated. “The only issue which remains for determination is whether there ought to be a retrial of the appellant.
He said the court, in looking at the matter and “in the public’s interest,” decided against having a retrial.
“The appellant himself would have been 49 at the date of the incident and is now 57 years old. Justice will probably not be served with respect to either of them if the events of that night in October 2012 have to be virtually relived by the parties and others around them,” Michel explained. “Witnesses may also be unavailable or unwilling to participate in a new trial likely to take place more than 8 years after the events or circumstances about which they testified at the previous trial.”
The Justice of Appeal said the balance was further swung against retrial by the fact that the appellant (Fontaine) has spent in excess of 4 years and 9 months in prison between the date of his conviction on 14th July 2015 and the date of this judgment.
Nobody do have to hide daughter from him because he didn’t do anything wrong but the truth will come out soon because my god is a good and mighty God.they all that plot that have to talk because they start already in God we trust. And mine your dirty business
I hope the ‘other girlfriend’ that was going to visit him in Stockie, who insisted that he was innocent, won’t have to hide her underage daughter from him…just saying.
This judge’ background should be investigated
WHAT WE UNDERSTOOD. The child is a minor under age and cannot give consent. The child see the man as a relative and trusted him as a family member old enough to be her dad. He took full advantage over the child and left her with a scar for life. Now the Judges are saying to Fountaine,we are boys together,you do me a favour and I return the compliments. What of the child’s life? There are over 2000 complaints of similar nature if not worst. THE JUDGES MUST GO .Protect the children.
The child molesters of the Eastern Caribbean must be jumping with joy at this crazy decision. Parents need to protect their children, boys and girls, from these rapists (She was under age).
I tell you what. This is the kind of crap the encourages vigilante justice. The court arguing about whether jury was prejudice and all this fancy court lingo and jargons make no sense to us laymen readers. I have one question. Did he have intercourse with an 11 year old? If yes what is the penalty? That is it. You caught with drugs on your property you walk free in Dominica. You kill a man you spend 4 years then walk out. You sell drugs all your life you can run a village council. You wash money and steal public purse you get to run for highest office. It seems like Justice must be applied by citizens. If was my daughter that guy woul have been in hell already. Then i just take my 4 years and get out. He will never abuse again. It seems there is one way get justice. Take it yourself.
This is sad and it seems as if the appeals court was only concerned about justice for the accused. They even ruled against a retrial putting forward some very childish reasons. This matter should be taken to the Caribbean Court of appeals for a resolution.
That is why prison will never lack men who tend to take justice in their own hands. I hope he learnt his lesson during the 4 years served, consider himself very luck and leave young children alone…SMMFH!
The Law is tilted to the side of criminals so that Satan can have his way so that the amoral lawyers and unsanctified judges of the justice system can rake in riches. Even so come Lord Jesus you are the only righteous judge
The sexual predator gets a gift while the child is being double victimized. What an injustice! He is being released back into society to continue his heinous acts. That psychotic individual has no boundaries and so the Nation should be informed of his residence in order to protect our vulnerable children! Lord have mercy on our children!
But a lot of the ground to not ordering a retrial were based on supposition by the appeal’s court judges.
For example they said “Justice will probably not be served with respect to either of them if the events of that night in October 2012 have to be virtually relived by the parties and others around them,” Michel explained”. How would they know if the VC would consider that as justice being served in the absence of a retrial? Did they ask the VC how she felt about the matter before they made that assumption?
Again they claimed: Witnesses may also be unavailable or unwilling to participate in a new trial likely to take place more than 8 years after the events or circumstances about which they testified at the previous trial.” Again how could they make that determination short of testing that assumption?
What I see is a guy who did a dastardly act walking free long before he should have.
So true. Just giving fuel to criminals and the destruction of the future generation.