The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

Tribune Staff Reporter

lmunnings@hotmail.com

THE Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeal of Vernal Johnson, upholding his 2022 conviction for murder and 32-year prison sentence following a bar altercation in 2018.

The incident occurred on February 9, 2018, at the El Rancho Bar, also known as “Boy’s Bar,” on Hutchinson and Eneas Streets. Johnson and his companion, Christopher Blyden, had visited the bar to locate Johnson’s father.

A fight broke out involving several patrons, including the deceased, Rico Taylor, also known as “Bobo”. Video footage, presented as evidence during the trial, showed Johnson pointing a firearm at Taylor and firing four shots, resulting in Taylor’s death. Two other people, Jarvis Joseph and Anfernee Major, were injured by gunfire during the incident.

Johnson argued that he acted in self-defence, claiming he was confronted by a group of men and feared for his life. A witness for Johnson, Quetel Ettienne, testified that she told him Taylor had a gun.

However, during cross-examination, Ms Ettienne acknowledged that she did not see Taylor and Johnson make physical contact or witness Johnson taking a gun from Taylor.

In his appeal, Johnson raised several issues, including an alleged failure by the trial judge to instruct the jury on self-defence properly and insufficient reasoning for rejecting a no-case submission. He also argued that the admission of video evidence without audio prejudiced the jury.

The Court of Appeal, led by Justice Jon Isaacs, concluded that while there were shortcomings in the trial judge’s instructions on self-defence, the overall outcome of the case was unaffected.

“The jury viewed the video evidence and were entitled to conclude that Johnson’s use of force was disproportionate,” the judgement said.

Regarding the video footage, the court noted its relevance, saying: “The video recordings, though lacking audio, provided clear visual evidence of the events and were admissible as real evidence.”

The judges were clear in their reasoning for dismissing the appeal, pointing to the overwhelming evidence presented at trial. 

They noted that even if the jury had been instructed differently, the outcome would likely have been the same due to the compelling nature of the video evidence and testimony. 

“Self-defence should only be left to the jury when there is evidence sufficiently strong to raise a prima facie case,” the judgement said, referencing precedents that guide such decisions.

The appellate panel, comprising Justice Isaacs, Justice Indra Charles, and Justice Bernard Turner, determined that the original verdict of a 32-year prison term imposed on February 2, 2023, was deemed appropriate given the gravity of the crime.