The jury in the trial of Neil Brown, accused of causing the death of Archdeacon William Thompson, handed down three unanimous guilty verdicts on Thursday.
Justice Anita Allen told the accused, “Neil Brown, the jury has found you guilty of the offence of murder. I therefore sentence you to suffer death in the manner prescribed by law.”
The seven women, five-man jury after deliberating for about two-and-a-half hours returned guilty verdicts on the charges of murder, burglary and attempted armed robbery between the dates of May 28 and June 23, 2000.
Brown who was attentive to the verdicts read by the jury foreman sat motionless in the prisoner’s dock as he heard the count for each verdict read was 12-zero. He made no outward sign in court, as to what affect each verdict had on him, nor was he reading his Bible as he had for most of the day during closing arguments and the direction of the judge to the jury.
However once outside, Brown said to family members: “Ya’ll think like it over; don’t think it over. Hold still. God still Jah.”
A short time later, Brown’s mother, in a very emotional state, just before he was ushered into a waiting police vehicle, rushed to him and kissed him on the cheek, stating, “It’s gon’ be okay baby, I still love you.”
Earlier, in court, she twirled her hair in a nervous state as she listened to the court proceedings.
Other family members present outside after being told the outcome of the case vowed that the conviction would be appealed, no matter what others might think.
Brown is expected to return to court on December 16 at 10 a.m. to be sentenced on the burglary and attempted armed robbery charges. Before that time a probation report will be conducted as per the request of defence attorney Michael Hanna.
Francis Cumberbatch presented the case for the Crown with the assistance of Neil Braithwaite.
Justice Allen, who directed the jury on the evidence, spoke to them for about an hour and a half, stressing to them that they were the judges of the facts. “You are the conscience of this community,” she said.
She informed the jury that they were there “to dispense justice.” Additionally she told them that they must not be persuaded by sympathy for the deceased, and put aside whatever prejudice they might have for the accused, when deciding the case.
As Justice Allen summarized much of the evidence of the case, she noted that the prosecution had to prove that: Mr. Thompson had died as a result of unlawful harm, within a year and a day of the offence; the harm was inflicted by the accused; and the accused inflicted the harm without being provoked.
For a murder verdict, she told the jury, the count had to be unanimous and for the other charges, the verdicts had to be a two-thirds verdict.
However before the jury was directed by Justice Allen, they heard the closing arguments from the Crown and the Defence.
Crown Prosecutor Cumberbatch, in his summing up, referred to the evidence of Mrs. Rosemarie Thompson, the wife of the deceased archdeacon.
“You will note that two-and-a-half years later she is still shaken, (and) it is clear that I was not exaggerating when I said that the silence, solemnity, and sanctity was broken that night,” he said.
“I will ask you,” he continued, “to imagine what they went through waking up three o’clock in the morning staring down the barrel of a shot gun.”
Mrs. Thompson described a masked, gloved intruder, which, Cumberbatch said, showed how the accused engaged in professional criminality.
He said that the man wore a mask so that he would not be identified and gloves so that he would not leave fingerprints.
He urged the jury: “Do not hold against him the fact that he was in prison; we are not interested in that. We are only interested in the evidence before this court.”
He said that the significance of Brown being in prison was that instead of being rehabilitated he was planning an operation of “mayhem, mischief and murder.”
He said that the accused clearly intended to finish the archdeacon off as he shot him a second time.
The prosecutor also pointed out that the accused opted to make an unsworn statement from the safety of the prisoner’s dock. The allegation of police brutality was not supported by Dr. Ricky Ricardo Davis, who said there was nothing to support the accused’s claims, he said, and the doctor’s evidence stood unchallenged.
“When you examine that this thing was planned in Fox Hill prison (and) carried out with such precision, demonstrates that the accused possesses a cold, callous and calculating criminal mind,” he said.
He said that intimate details as the accused burning his clothing and praying after he heard the news of the priest’s death, would not have been known by the police.
With regard to Brown’s recorded visit to the rectory, he said, “Look at the amount of familiarity; he knew exactly where to go. He walked around the people’s house as if he owned it.”
When the evidence was viewed in totality, Cumberbatch concluded, it would be proven that the burden of proof was satisfied on all three counts.
He invited jurors to return a verdict according to the oath which they took, and according to the evidence in the matter.
Attorney for the Defence, Michael Hanna, in his brief, but pointed address, said: “The matter before this court is most unfortunate. What we challenged throughout the whole trial was the framing of Neil Brown.”
He maintained that his client was beaten by police. He also asked jurors not to hold Brown’s past against him.
“I want you to be very objective in your deliberations,” he told the jurors.
By Jimenita Swain, The Nassau Guardian
