Sixty-three-year-old Xavier St Ville of Boetica was sentenced to serve a six-month sentence, suspended for 18 months, for causing grievous bodily harm to a man from that community last year.
He pleaded guilty to the charge before Justice Birnie Stephenson-Brooks at the High Court of Justice yesterday.
St Ville, who cut Leslie St Jean’s right hand with a cutlass during an incident in Boetica at January 2, 2010, was also ordered to pay compensation of $6,000 to him. He will do this through monthly installments of $250 until the sum is paid.
During his suspended sentence, St Ville is expected to keep the peace and not have any run-ins with the law or he will serve the six months in jail.
According to the facts of the case, which were presented by state lawyer Clement Joseph, St Ville, a farmer, had a some yams outside of a shop belonging to Veronic St Ville in that community. St Jean, who was in the vicinity, inquired about the yams and when he found out it they belong to the accused, he took two and went home.
He placed the yams outside his house and was in the process of climbing a sour-sop tree when he heard a noise, looked back and saw the defendant. He noticed that St Ville had a fertilizer bag behind him.
In a brief moment, the defendant made a swing at the complainant’s right hand, which was holding the sour-sop tree. St Jean then had to release the tree with his right hand and use his left hand that was injured by the defendant.
The laceration, involved tendon and bone damage, according to a doctor’s report which the state’s lawyer read in court. The tendons were repaired and the bones were reattached with screws. According to the prosecutor, the wound was expected to cause loss of function and weakened grip in the arm, in addition to scaring.
Attorney Peter Alleyne, who represented the defendant, told the court that his client and the complainant were good friends and it was out of character that such an incident would occur.
He told the court that the complainant had actually taken an entire heap of yams which belonged to the defendant. Alleyne claimed that his client was repeatedly threatened by the complainant with a cutlass before the incident occured.
“If a man tell you to leave his yard, the best thing to do is leave his yard…” Alleyne said.
The complainant, who was present at court told the judge that he had done physiotherapy at the Princess Margaret Hospital after the incident.
He claimed that doctors and nurses had told him to rub the wound with snake, chicken and Grace oil.
“It come better we. It was big,” he said. When asked if he could work with his hand he stated, “I cannot work strong, little work.”
The complainant insisted that he only took two yams despite what the defense stated in their mitigation.
When asked whether he was still friends with the defendant St Jean said, “Since when he chap my hand he not my friend again.”
In responding to both the facts and the complainant’s comments, the judge stated, “the man was wrong to chop you and you were wrong to take his yam. You were wrong and he was wrong and where I come from two wrongs don’t make a right.”
The complainant is 42 years old.
well all i can say to that is if your friend can do that to you i cannot imagine what your enemy can do
Look Jokes
So you mean a 63 year old man cannot control himself? I expect that type of behaviour from a teenager. The man ought to know better than to chop someone. Wht kind of example can he set for his grandchildren. If I were the judge, I would definitely send him to prison for 5 years.
It is a strange end to this case. The man should be paid for his yams.
There are some people who look for trouble as the man who took the yams of his friend. He is an instigator. He should have asked his friend and not stolen those yams. He was rather bold to steal his friends’s yams. Some friend he was.
Thieves steal. They should always pay the price for their actions. Since the situation came to this and sadly so, he, too, should have been handed down a sentence for stealing what which did not belong to him. It appears that he did not receive a strong enough reprimand for stealing and no sentence.
What type of friends were they? If they were sincere friends none of these incidents would have occured. Sad they were good friends and now they are enemies. One for stealing yams; the other for chapping his hand.
There are some people who really are in dire need of the blessing and grace of God. Those two are in need of godly virtues.
tTWO WRONGS DON’T MAKE A RIGHT BUT CUTTING YOUR FRIEND’S HAND FOR A YAM THATS WICKED. WHO KNOWS MAYBE HE DID NOT HAD ANY THING TO EAT THAT WHY HE TOOK THE YAMS.
so why the hell did’t he ask, the idea that people think that they can take what they need when they need it in the name of friendship and then play victim is bloody ridiculous, one think we all know for sure the idiot will never be able to steal again, and i beg please don’t make my man feel guilty for protecting his produce, who cannot feel will hear.
How can the court not impose a custodial sentence on a man convicted of chopping a person with a cutlass?
This is what encourages lawlessness in Dominica. The court has to send a message that people cannot take the law into their hands. The defendant ought to have reported the matter to the police. Give the sentences I have seen for petty crime, I am sure Mr. St Jean would have been sentenced to about 6 months in prison for stealing the man’s yams.
I cannot condone the action of Mr. St Jean. I also cannot support a noncustodial sentence for aggravated assault. This is not the wild west.
I am appalled at some decisions taken by the court. I agree both people are wrong. But how does the court reward a thief? The accused is wrong. He is wrong for going all the way to the man’s house and attack him. He should have gone to the police instead. So, he is wrong. But a thief? He said the man was his friend. Why didn’t he help the man to plant and reap his crop? Why didn’t he ask the man for a yam? Why does he think he have the right to just take even a piece of yam? Then the courts award him money? He does not deserve it!! I agree if the courts impose a charge on the accused. It would be beneficial to the state but not to reward a voleur. He cannot work now!! What about before? If he was working he would not be stealing.
true that…the court is rewardin him for stealin…dats not fair. i dont agree with dat decision at all.he should pay the man for his yam n yes the man can be sentenced for cuttin his arm
the judge did the right thing. you know why that man took the law into his hands he was judge jury and executioner sure he should not have stollen the yam i dont think he will steal another yam in a hurry but thats why we have police officers
LMAO!!!!!!
Man comes and take say 5 yam, you go and get your cutlas and chop him. How much is that you lost? say $10.00, now you still lost your yam and have to end up giving the guy $250.00 every month.LMAO!!!!
yow all u killing me. hahhahahahahhahahahhahahhahhhhaha. mr would take a jail if it was somewhere esle. if u want to committ crime just come to da and u will be free. This is crazy. all criminals going free in da that is most of the serious crimes. D man was following the bible. if yur hand cause u to steal cut it off.
Look nonsense !!! six grand – $250 a month – and the man probably cannot even plant yams of fig the same way anymore because his hand messed up? Is now he going and vorler people yams.
Was he ever planting yam or fig before the incident? if so, why did he steal his friend’s yam?
leasle u dealy u win ur case and they sayin u cannot talk
u is a big man 6 grand
u must be a labourite too think 6 grand is big money lol
lol!
leasy boy u dealy u win ur case and they saying u cannot talk