Massinissa Adams and Others v R

JurisdictionJamaica
JudgeHarris JA
Judgment Date29 November 2013
Neutral CitationJM 2013 CA 122,[2013] JMCA Crim 59
CourtCourt of Appeal (Jamaica)
Docket NumberSUPREME COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS 116, 124 and 125/2009
Date29 November 2013
Between
Massinissa Adams
and
R
Amar Dawkins
Rohan Townsend

[2013] JMCA Crim 59

Before:

The Hon Mrs Justice Harris JA

The Hon Miss Justice Phillips JA

The Hon Mr Justice Brooks JA

SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS 116, 124 and 125/2009

JAMAICA

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

CRIMINAL LAW - Murder - Death sentence - Appeal to reduce sentence to imprisonment - Offences Against the Person Act, S. 3(1)(a) - Effect of admission of caution statement - No case submission - Character evidence

Mrs Carolyn Reid-Cameron for Massinissa Adams

Leroy Equiano for Kamar Dawkins

L Jack Hines for Rohan Townsend

Mrs Lisa Palmer Hamilton and Mrs Christine Johnson Spence for the Crown

Harris JA
1

Massinissa Adams, Kamar Dawkins and Rohan Townsend were charged on an indictment with the murder of Assistant Commissioner of Police Gilbert Kameka, who was shot and killed on 29 November 2007. They were convicted on 9 November 2009. Adams was sentenced to death and Dawkins and Townsend sentenced to life imprisonment with a stipulation that they should not become eligible for parole before a period of 30 years and 20 years respectively had elapsed. Adams' application for leave to appeal against sentence was granted by a single judge but his application in respect of conviction was refused. The applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence in respect of both Dawkins and Townsend were refused by the single judge. Dawkins and Townsend have renewed their applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence before this court.

2

Several witnesses gave evidence during the trial, most of whom were police officers, but the main witness for the prosecution was Miss Tina Gay McGowan who, it appeared, had been intimately involved with the deceased at the time of the murder, having been introduced to him in September of 2007. The appellant Adams was also known to her, in that he was her ex-boyfriend at the time of the murder and was someone with whom she communicated on a regular basis. At this point, it will be convenient to set out the evidence against each man separately as well as their respective defences.

The prosecution's case in relation to the appellant Adams
3

Miss McGowan gave evidence that on the night before he was murdered, the deceased telephoned her, telling her that he wanted to see her. Although she resided in Gordon Town, St Andrew, at the time she had been staying with a friend, Tasheka, in Irish Town. The deceased and her made arrangements for him to visit her at Tasheka's house. Sometime after that conversation, she spoke to the appellant Adams over the telephone. She had seen the appellant about two days prior to the incident as she had gone to an area called Ravinia to comb his hair, he having asked her to do so. Adams inquired whether she was still friendly with the deceased, to which she responded in the affirmative. He then told her that ‘we are going to come up there to get the gun’. To this, she agreed. The appellant had learnt that the deceased carried a gun as Miss McGowan had told him of this a month earlier. She told the appellant that the deceased would be visiting her in Irish Town on the day following this conversation.

4

On the day of the event, Miss McGowan received a telephone call from the deceased. She and Tasheka went to meet him, he having arrived in Irish Town and parked his vehicle in the vicinity of a wholesale shop on the road. The three of them walked back to Tasheka's house, which was located a few chains from the road, down a hill. This was sometime around 11:00 o'clock in the morning. There was another female at the house, but she left soon after they arrived. While they were at the house, the appellant called Miss McGowan to inquire whether the deceased had arrived and upon receiving the confirmation, he told her he was on his way. Miss McGowan then left the house again, this time accompanying Tasheka to the bus stop. On her way, she called the appellant Adams to find out if he had reached and on her way back, the appellant and another man joined her. She said she had seen the other man before in Ravinia when she went to see the appellant, but she did not know him. Both men were armed with guns. They all went back to the house where the appellant and the other man used handkerchiefs to cover their mouths and noses before entering the house. They pounced upon the deceased who was on his cellular phone in a room. The appellant fired two shots killing him, after which, he went over and took the deceased's service pistol from the deceased's waistband. Miss McGowan and the two men then ran from the house. Upon reaching the road, the appellant told her to go to the police station to report the killing. However, he did not instruct her as to what she should tell the police. He and the other man then boarded a car and left.

5

On 6 December 2007, a police party, on special operations, went to premises located at 64 Crescent Road. Upon entering a dwelling house, they saw a man (who proved to be the applicant Dawkins) hiding under a divan bed in a living room who directed them to the appellant who was hiding in the ceiling of the house in another room. Upon a police officer entering the ceiling to apprehend the appellant, he said,‘Offisah, nuh kill mi, me did a guh gi up mi self but mi “fraid.’ One of the police officers assisted the appellant in climbing down from the ceiling, but before the appellant did so, he threw a LG cellular phone to the floor, which was seized by the police and submitted for cell site analysis. Upon being apprehended he also said, ‘A nuh me shot the policeman, is “Bling” and him point the gun at mi and tell mi fi rob him.’

Adam's defence
6

Adams gave a detailed unsworn statement from the dock in which he admitted knowing Miss McGowan but explained that when questioned by the police the reason he had denied knowing her was that the police ‘say when I am in custody, every day Tina McGowan say I kill somebody and I didn't kill anybody’. The two of them, he said, had been involved in a relationship, but they had gone their separate ways and he had not seen her for almost two years. The reason, he said, he went into the ceiling was that he had heard some excitement and shots and it was not because he felt guilty. He denied knowing the applicant Townsend prior to being taken into custody, but admitted to seeing the applicant Dawkins sometimes in the Liguanea area. He needed a place to stay for a while and through a friend of his, he learnt that the applicant Dawkins had somewhere available to rent, but that Dawkins had to get the permission of his cousin. Both he and the applicant Dawkins travelled to the cousin's house on Crescent Road. While the cousin had left the house, the police party went there. He said that Miss McGowan told the police that he was innocent, and she was persuaded by the offer of a visa to change her story.

The prosecution's case against the applicant Dawkins
7

The evidence of the police was that on 6 December 2007, a police party, on special operations, visited the premises at 64 Crescent Road and discovered a man hiding under the bed; that man who was pulled out from under the bed identified himself as Kamar Dawkins, otherwise known as ‘Bling’. Corporal Leighton Bucknor, said that, the applicant upon being pulled from under the bed, said to him, ‘Officer nuh kill mi, nuh kill mi, a nuh me kill the policeman,’ and under caution he said, ‘Officer a nuh mi kill the policeman a Irish Town, a Massi.’ Sergeant Glen McGill, who was also a part of the police party gave evidence that under caution the applicant said, ‘A Massy shot the policeman and force mi fi rob him.’

8

Evidence was also given by Paul Hayden that in December 2007, he was at the Half Way Tree lockup on a charge of receiving stolen property. He and three other men were in cell five when they were joined by the applicant Dawkins. The applicant was crying. He was distraught and complained that his friend's girlfriend had betrayed him, and his (the applicant's) mother had informed the police where he could be found. As it was their practice to do, the prisoners questioned him with a view to ascertaining the particular charge that had brought him to the lockup. If a new prisoner had committed certain heinous crimes such as buggery or carnal abuse, he would be put in cell four. Hayden explained that, as a ‘yardie’ in the cells, he was in charge of locking up the prisoners and serving them food and could therefore easily have the applicant removed to cell four. He said that one of his cellmates, Kevin, questioned the applicant about the reason for his incarceration, and he responded that it was the death of the ‘second in command Commissioner of Police’ that had brought him there. The applicant then related that his friend's girlfriend had arranged with him and his friend to rob a contractor of his credit card. She had called them on the morning when that man visited her and they had gone to the house. His friend shot the man twice and took away the man's firearm. After they left the house they went to a place called Rat Bat Tavern and when the police had come into the area, his friend had gone to hide in the ceiling, while he lay on a bed pretending to be asleep.

9

Hayden said that he did not volunteer information in relation to the incident as he had not wanted to get involved. However, his cellmate had given a statement to the police and his name had been mentioned to the police. He said that, before he was charged with receiving stolen property, he had been taken into custody on another case arising from the incident which had resulted in the charge of receiving stolen property. He denied receiving any benefit in giving evidence and said that his case was still before the court. In cross-examination he admitted that he had been transferred to the Half Way Tree lockup in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Rayon Williams v R
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 19 Noviembre 2022
    ...for life with recommendations of periods of incarceration before parole eligibility. Those were: 1. Massinissa Adams et al v R [2013] JMCA Crim 59, the appellant was convicted of the murder of an assistant commissioner of police. The sentence was life imprisonment with a recommendation that......
  • Germaine Smith v R
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 15 Enero 2021
    ...life and this court ordered that he should serve 30 years before becoming eligible for parole. 101 In Massinissa Adams and others v R [2013] JMCA Crim 59 three men entered a house which a senior police officer was visiting. They killed him and took his firearm. This court sentenced the mast......
  • Jeffery Peart v R Roxanne Peart
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 21 Mayo 2021
    ...by the sentence imposed on the appellant, Massinissa Adams, in the case of Massinissa Adams, Kamar Dawkins and Rohan Townsend v R [2013] JMCA Crim 59. It was submitted that this was an equally serious offence which resulted in a police officer being killed; as such it was comparable to the ......
  • Troy Barrett v R
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 8 Abril 2022
    ...eligibility for parole (see Peter Dougal v R [2011] JMCA Crim 13, Ian Gordon v R [2012] JMCA Crim 11, Massinissa Adams and Others v R [2013] JMCA Crim 59 and Calvin Powell and Another v R [2013] JMCA Crim Analysis 93 It is true that the learned trial judge, in her summation, was of few word......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT