By Shanique Richards
St. Kitts Reporter
William ‘Harry’ Belle who was charged with the offense of ‘Causing Grievous Bodily Harm’ and ‘Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm’ on Collin ‘Buku’ Rawlins was acquitted of those charges on Monday. His Lordship Francis Belle stated that there was no case and that the matter should not have even passed the P.I. as all witnesses were in favor of the accused.
“I do not wish to embarrass anyone, but this matter should not have even passed the magistrate’s court. All witnesses state that the complainant was the aggressor!” he said.
The particulars of the case stated that William ‘Harry’ Belle, on October 20, 2004 at about 10pm, pushed Collin Rawlins, fracturing his hand. Belle allegedly did this in an effort to get Rawlins out of the shop because he behaved disorderly. The DPP called three witnesses to testify.
The first witness was the virtual complainant, Collin ‘Buku’ Rawlins. Rawlins stated that on the night in question, he met a friend who asked him to buy some ‘hammon’ so they left and went to a shop in St. Pauls.
“Harry was de caretaker of de shop and when ah reach ah crowd ah people was talking ‘bout PAM and Labour. I ask him to sell me a quarter ah hammon an he tell me me must ‘go out de shop’. I then tell him that de lady leave him to make money and not to run people. He den come from behind de counter and run me out and when ah reach by de door ah start to ‘buse him and dats when he push me down in de drain and break me hand.
“Me ehn know wha Harry shub me down for, me ehn do him nothing!” said Rawlins.
He also stated that after he stayed and argued for a while then went home to tend to his hand and when he got there he realized that his hand was swollen and in a lot of pain. He said the next day he made a complaint at the St. Pauls Police Station and was sent to the hospital where he saw the bone specialist and his hand was bound in plaster of paris.
Defense lawyer Karl Liburd then cross examined the witness, said he was lying and gave his own version of what happened.
He said Rawlins entered the shop drunk carrying a Carib bottle in his hands and someone said, “Yuh girlfriend Tina got you mumu and she ain’t want you” and everybody in the shop started laughing. Then Rawlins smashed his beer bottle on the floor and was asked to leave. Harry then came from behind the counter to clean up the mess and went outside to take it to the garbage and then Rawlins accused Harry of splashing water on him while he was passing. Then Rawlins kicked water on Harry. After, Harry pushed him and he fell and hit a parked jeep and slid down and hit his bottom.
It was then introduced that Rawlins left, went home returned with two long knives, one in each hand and began to threaten Harry, “Come out nah, if you come out here ah goin’ butcha you tonight”. That is when Harry closed the shop and went home.
The complainant (Rawlins) denied that these things ever happened and said after he went home that evening he never returned with knives and that he did not enter the shop drunk with a beer bottle in his hands. He claimed that all the defense was telling lies.
The prosecution then called its two eyewitnesses who were in the shop that evening and they both sided with the defense’s version of what happened. Both witnesses testified that Rawlins started the brawl by coming into the shop drunk and arguing with everyone. They also said he was the aggressor as he kicked water on Harry. It was also stated that when he left that evening his hand did not seem injured. They both added that after Rawlins had fallen he got up and started choking Harry with the same hands and a by-stander had to separate them.
“Buku come back wid two long knife in he hands and started to say, “come out no if you no wa good come out cause a going butcha you tonight,” said the eye witnesses.
After hearing the testimony of the Prosecution’s witnesses the defense mad a submission to the court in the absence of the jury which stated that the case be dismissed because all evidence goes in favor of the accused.
“This accused has no case to answer. The evidence leaves great doubt and the witnesses do not support the complainant. Also be reminded that these are not defense witnesses but the Prosecution’s my Lord.
“He came back armed to the teeth using that same right hand after testifying that he went home and never came back,” Liburd said.
The Prosecution tried to make a rebuttal stating that regardless of his behavior it was proven that he was pushed. However, His Lordship sided with the defense.
“This is not what the defense says, these are your own witnesses and they all say that there was an altercation that Rawlins started. After, Rawlins kicked water on the man which was an assault; he had a right to push him. Not because he ended up getting the worse means that he has the right to charge someone. If anything I would say that the accused was trying to protect his shop and his customers,” said His Lordship.
The jury was then directed to return a ‘Not Guilty’ verdict on both counts and the charges were dismissed.
