45-year-old Julius Branker, who in 2018 had been unanimously convicted of raping a woman at knifepoint in her home and had been sentenced to 40 years’ imprisonment, has had his conviction and sentence set aside by the Court of Appeal (CoA) of Guyana on Tuesday, December 13, 2022. That Court found, among other things, that he had had an unfair trial, and has therefore ordered that he be retried for the offence.
After a trial before Justice Simone Morris-Ramlall at the Sexual Offences Court in Demerara, Branker had been found guilty by a mixed 12-member jury of engaging in sexual penetration of the woman against her will. This offence is alleged to have occurred on February 15, 2014 at a location in Linden, Region 10 (Upper Demerara-Berbice). In consequence of his conviction, he had been sentenced to serve 35 years’ imprisonment before becoming eligible for parole.
In delivering the Appellate Court’s ruling, acting Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Yonette Cummings-Edwards, who along with Justices of Appeal Dawn Gregory-Barnes and Rishi Persaud had heard Branker’s appeal, agreed with his contention that there were issues with the identification evidence, and that the trial Judge had failed to adequately put his defence to the jury.
Recalling the evidence presented during Branker’s trial, the Chancellor said that apart from testifying that she had known Branker from seeing him in her neighbourhood, the virtual complainant had also said that she recognized him after he was featured on “Court Round-Up”.
“Court Round-Up” is an aspect of MTV News Update which reports on persons who are primarily charged with, and/or are convicted of, criminal offences and other court-related matters. Given that the virtual complainant’s testimony of her seeing Branker on “Court Round-Up” deals with identification, and with the trial Judge having failed to give the jurors the necessary directions, the CoA noted that the jury was not able to “dispassionately” come to a verdict.
Moreover, the Court of Appeal noted that the trial Judge did not adequately put Branker’s defence of alibi to the jury, and that a miscarriage of justice had occurred when the trial Judge had declined to grant his then lawyer, the now late Maxwell McKay, more time to prepare his client’s defence.
Branker, through Attorney-at-Law Adrian Thompson, had also argued that the sentence imposed on him was manifestly excessive in the circumstances of the case, and was not in keeping with established sentencing guidelines.
Rape accused Julius Branker
Because the CoA has found that Branker’s conviction was unsafe, and in light of its decision to quash it, there was no need for his appeal against sentence to be considered. Given the strength of the prosecution’s case and the serious nature of the offence for which Branker had been accused, the CoA, in quashing his conviction, ordered that he be retried at the next practicable sitting of the Demerara Criminal Assizes.
Branker’s lawyer had requested that his client be released on reasonable bail pending the retrial, but the Court of Appeal has said it preferred for him to make a formal application before a High Court Judge.
Senior State Counsel Mercedes Glasford had presented the prosecution’s case, the contention of which is that on the day in question, the woman was in her home sleeping when, at around 04:00h, she was awakened by noise coming from the television. As a result, she ventured into the living room, switched off the television and went back to take a nap.
Shortly after, she was awakened by a man standing at her bedside, and she began screaming. The man, in demanding that she “shut up”, threatened to “bore her” with a knife. It is alleged that the man, believed to be Branker, pushed his hands into the woman’s pajamas and then had vaginal intercourse with her against her will in full view of her young child.
After allegedly committing the act, the man, believed to be Branker, reportedly made good his escape, and the complainant sought help from neighbours. She was taken to the Wismar Police Station, and then to the hospital, to be examined by doctors. Branker was subsequently apprehended, and charged with the crime after the virtual complainant had identified him as the perpetrator.
Despite the jury’s verdict, Branker had maintained his innocence, telling Justice Morris-Ramlall, “I am not guilty of this case…”
