By Marlon Madden
Repeat gun offenders face the possibility of life in prison under new legislation passed in the House of Assembly on Friday.
Declaring that Government will not be “soft” on criminals, Attorney General, Dale Marshall, introduced a Firearms (Amendment) Bill which provides for tougher sentences for those convicted of firearm-related offences.
The law provides for a judge to sentence a person who is found guilty of a second or subsequent firearm offence to a minimum of 20 years in jail and up to life imprisonment.
“So the criminal element, be warned. If this is the road you persist on going down, then you will find yourselves not before a smiling judge; you will find yourself before a judge who has the strong powers of sentencing required to send a message,” a tough-talking Marshall said as he piloted the Bill in the Lower House.
He stressed that the legislation was not only intended to punish individuals but to send a message to “people who may feel they can do this and get away with it”.
“Now, we hope that this will send a signal to the criminal elements. Those fellows who like to walk around with guns and so on. We hope they understand they cannot defeat the state. There may be 100 or 200 of them, but there are 300 000 of us, and we will do whatever is necessary to protect the 300 000 of us against the 100, 150 or 200 of you, and this [amendment] is one of those steps,” Marshall declared.
An individual who is found guilty of a firearm offence under the Firearms (Amendment) Act, for the first time will be sentenced to no less than 10 years and no more than 20 years, with one exception.
That exception is that a person who was convicted of an indictable firearm offence before the amendment took effect, could also be sentenced to imprisonment for life or a lesser term not less than 20 years if convicted for the first time under the amended legislation.
The legislation also makes provision for the judge to impose a fine of $100 000 on a first-time offender who is given the lesser sentence, except if the person was 18 years at the time of the commission of the offence; the person has not been previously convicted of an indictable offence of a violent nature; public safety and public order will not be prejudiced; or the court is of the opinion that there are exceptional circumstances relating to the offence or the person convicted of the offence which justify it not doing so.
“I want the criminals to reflect on this. People are saying ‘y’all soft’. No Sir, we [are] not soft. We never were soft but the point is, we are saying now that our level of tolerance for the criminal and his foolishness has now vanished to the point where we are prepared to say that you can be subject to a sentence of life imprisonment on a second firearm offence,” Marshall said.
The Attorney General further explained that even if an individual accused of murder with a firearm is found not guilty based on a technicality, they could still end up spending the rest of their life behind bars, under the legislation.
“He could find himself, if this is a second offence, staring a life sentence in the face because he can be convicted of the firearm offence,” he stressed.
“I do not know how much harsher a law could be established than this, but it still gives the court the discretion in special circumstances, to deviate from it.”
Marshall spoke about changes to the Juries Act to deal with trials of murder accused who are alleged to have used firearms in the commission of the crime.
“We have taken the opportunity to make an amendment to the Juries Act . . . . This is one that we feel we need to change. A person who is charged with murder must be tried by a jury of 12 people. But . . . if he uses a firearm and kills somebody he isn’t generally charged with the firearm offence because under the law as it stands, a firearm offence requires a jury of nine people.
“So, it essentially puts the state through the trouble of doing two trials and sometimes a person again may get off the murder charge, but the evidence they used a firearm is incontrovertible. So we feel that rather than putting the state to do over a new trial, we are saying a jury of 12 people can still make a determination on a firearm offence in a capital case. We think it is practical, it is sensible and something we should have done a long time ago,” explained the Attorney General.
The Firearms (Amendment) Act also makes provision for an individual guilty of more than one firearm offence from the same event or a series of events, to serve consecutive prison terms, rather than concurrent sentences.
Marshall explained: “Normally, you are found guilty of a dozen things and the court looks at the overall circumstances and so on, and then they say ‘for this you get three years, for that you get six years and for the next thing you get that’, but you end up serving only the longest of the time.
“Not so anymore with firearm offences. We are adding the two together. You
are man enough to commit two offences, well, feel two sentences of punishment consecutively.”
In outlining the harsher penalties for gun crime, Marshall told the House of Assembly that while authorities would do whatever they could to save the island’s youth from getting involved in gun crimes, “we are going to save our society first”.
So far this year there have been 35 murders, 26 of them committed by gunmen.
marlonmadden@barbadostoday.bb
