Bus conductor’s life sentence overturned

A conductor who was slapped with a life sentence for stabbing another conductor to death in a New Year’s Eve dispute over passengers had his sentence overturned by the Court Appeal and replaced with a 27-year, nine-month prison term.

The appellant, Roland Bronstorph, was found guilty of killing Kenroy Smith, in December 2014, at the Rural Metropolitan Bus Terminus on Darling Street in Kingston, during a dispute that arose after passengers left Smith’s bus, which had been waiting in the terminus for three hours, and flocked Bronstorphs’ bus when he drove in and started calling out for passengers.

Bronstorph, 59, who maintained that he was provoked and had claimed self-defence, was sentenced in June 2019 to life in prison with a stipulation that he serve 15 years before becoming eligible for parole.

He subsequently appealed his conviction on the grounds that the judge had erred in giving him a life sentence that was manifestly excessive and that the judge erred in law by not advising his counsel of the life sentence and inviting him to make submissions.

The Court of Appeal judges – Justices Marva McDonald-Bishop, Marcia Dunbar-Green, and Kissock Laing – in handing down the judgment, allowed the sentence in part and set aside the life sentence but affirmed that the appellant shall serve 15 years before eligibility for parole.

“We are satisfied that the life sentence imposed by the learned judge was not following the applicable principles.

“Having regard to the applicable principles examined in this judgment regarding the imposition of a discretionary life sentence and the aggravating and mitigating features relating to the offence and offender, we are satisfied that the appropriate sentence to be imposed in this case was a determinate term of imprisonment rather than life imprisonment,” the judges concluded in the judgment, which was published earlier this month.

Separated by onlooker

On the Crown’s case, both men, who were conductors on buses that plied the Kingston to Ocho Rios in St Ann route, got into an argument that turned into a physical fight.

During the altercation, in which heated words were exchanged, the men were separated by onlookers, including the Crown’s sole eyewitness, Sergeant Iron, an off-duty policeman.

The lawman spoke to both men and instructed Bronstorph to leave with his packed bus while onlookers pulled Smith away. However, shortly after, the police heard a commotion coming from the direction in which Smith had gone and went to check, seeing both men in a tussle.

Bronstorph was seen by the policeman stabbing Smith, who was unarmed, and the lawman, with the help of onlookers, managed to disarm Bronstorph.

Smith, who received a stab wound to his right thigh and two to his chest, suffered a fractured rib and collapsed lung, was taken to the hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries.

Bronstorph, when cautioned, had reportedly said, “Officer, a him and him friends dem rush me, and mi just swing mi knife”.

According to him in his defence, on the day of the incident, he was loading his bus when Smith approached him and “draped” him, saying “Country bwoy! Yuh nah load before mi, ennu”. Bronstorph said he, too, “draped” Smith, and a fight ensued but that they were parted by the policeman.

Attacked three men

He said he resumed loading his bus before leaving to purchase a phone card. On his return, he said he was about to pass Smith when three men attacked him. Smith, he said, grabbed him tightly by his neck, so much so that he felt as if he was about to die, and as a result, he took out his knife and swung it in the direction of the now deceased.

The appellant claimed that the stab wounds received by Smith were a result of him fighting for his life.

Attorney-at-law Hugh Wilson had argued that the judge was obligated both at common law under statute to inform defence counsel that she intended to impose a life imprisonment term and invite submissions as to the appropriate sentence.

He submitted that the trial judge’s failure deprived the appellant of the opportunity to show cause why life imprisonment should not have been imposed on him.

He also argued that a sentence of life imprisonment was not appropriate in the circumstances of the case and that the maximum life sentence under Section 3(1)(b) of the Offences Against the Person Act was reserved for the worst cases of murder.

Lawyers for the Crown disagreed, however, stating that he had sufficient opportunity to address the court on the appropriate sentence during his plea-in-mitigation. They submitted further that the sentence was not improper but rather, was “overly generous in the circumstance”.

The appellate judges found, however, that the judge’s failure to invite or hear specific representations regarding the imposition of life imprisonment was not fatal.

Additionally, they concluded that there was nothing identified by the judge or the court that would reasonably suggest that a sentence of life imprisonment was warranted in the circumstances, based on the applicable sentencing principles, including the aims of sentencing and the seriousness of the offence that was committed and the evidence of the appellant’s character.

“Nothing indicates that the appellant, who had no relevant previous convictions and was gainfully employed, at age 57, was dangerous to public safety and could not be returned to society after a reasonably lengthy determinate sentence,” the appellate judge said.

tanesha.mundle@gleanerjm.com