Central Trinidad man loses appeal for kidnapping, robbery of call centre employee in 2000

THREE years after he was sentenced to serve a little over ten years for the role he played in the kidnapping and robbery of a call centre employee in 2000, a Central Trinidad man will begin serving his sentence, starting December 1.

Anderson Bonaparte, who has been out on bail since August 2023 while awaiting the hearing of his appeal on conviction and sentence, was returned to custody to begin serving his sentence, minus the eight months and two days he spent on remand before securing bail.

Bonaparte had sought to convince the Court of Appeal to overturn his 2022 convictions for kidnapping, false imprisonment and robbery with aggravation, along with his sentence for offences dating back to 2000. On December 1, he lost his appeal before Justices of Appeal Charmaine Pemberton, Gillian Lucky and Vasheist Kokaram.

Bonaparte was arrested and charged in November 2000, with kidnapping, false imprisonment, rape, robbery with aggravation and assault with intent to rob. He was tried between July and December 2022. On October 11, 2022, his trial judge, then-High Court judge Carla Brown-Antoine, upheld a no-case submission on the rape and assault-with-intent-to-rob charges, and a jury returned not-guilty verdicts on those counts.

He was convicted on November 9, 2022, of kidnapping, false imprisonment and robbery with aggravation. He later received prison terms for those convictions and was given time to appeal.

In his appeal, Bonaparte argued several grounds, including that the trial judge failed to instruct the jury on the essential elements of the offences and improperly directed them that the offences had been committed. His attorney, Peter Carter, said this usurped the jury’s role and undermined the fairness of the trial.

Special prosecutor Wayne Rajbansie countered that the live issue in the trial was whether Bonaparte acted under duress while three other men committed the offences, not whether the offences occurred. The prosecution maintained that detailing the legal ingredients of each offence would have distracted the jury from determining whether Bonaparte was a participant in a joint enterprise or merely present under threat.

Bonaparte also challenged the admission of evidence concerning the convictions of one of the other men, Owusu Williams, arguing that the jury should have been warned that Williams’ guilty pleas could not be used as evidence against him. The appellate panel noted that the information was introduced by agreement and served to support Bonaparte’s claim of duress, nor was he prejudiced by it.

Another ground involved the jury’s exposure to evidence on rape and assault with intent to rob, despite the judge having upheld a no-case submission on those charges. The appellate judges pointed out that the trial judge had directed jurors not to assume guilt or innocence on the remaining charges based on the dismissal of the two counts and had warned them to analyse all evidence carefully. They also dismissed his criticisms of the judge’s directions on his defence of duress.

In dismissing all grounds of his appeal, the judges varied Bonaparte’s sentences for false imprisonment and robbery with aggravation — reducing each by one year due to a mathematical error — but upheld the ten-year sentence for kidnapping.

In delivering the ruling, Pemberton outlined the responsibilities of prosecutors, defence attorneys and trial judges, saying counsel’s duties are fundamental to a fair process. Prosecutors, she said, “are prosecutors, not persecutors,” and must ensure the rights of the accused are respected, while defence counsel must challenge the State’s case and advance the best defence without compromising the integrity of the system.

She said judges must remain impartial arbiters who ensure accuracy in their directions to juries, warning that unnecessary instructions may confuse. She also emphasised that both prosecution and defence counsel share responsibility for safeguarding the process.

Trial judge Brown-Antoine was also commended for her detailed oral and written directions to the jury. Pemberton said all participants must remain engaged with criminal procedural rules to ensure justice is served.

Four men were initially charged with the crimes, but Williams pleaded guilty, another died before the matter went to trial, and the state offered no evidence against the fourth man. Bonaparte was the only accused facing trial for the November 2000 offences, which began with the kidnapping and false imprisonment of the victim, who, along with two co-workers, was awaiting transport in Chaguaramas.

Williams and the other two men, the state advanced at trial, hired Bonaparte, who was working his boss's car for private hire with his then-girlfriend. The victim and her coworkers were picked up by Bonaparte, who was forced to stop the car when it developed mechanical problems. Her co-workers managed to escape, but the victim was bundled into the car by Williams and his accomplices, armed with a gun and a cutlass. They blindfolded her and demanded the PIN numbers for her bank cards, before she was taken to an unknown location in Central Trinidad, where the men took turns raping her. Bonaparte and his girlfriend remained in the car. The victim was then taken to a deserted area in Cunupia and abandoned. She later walked to Jerningham Junction, Cunupia and was taken to the police station. Bonaparte's girlfriend advised him to report the incident, but he said he was scared since the men knew where he lived and had threatened him. Before taking her home, she stopped and seemingly tipped off the police, giving them directions on where they had left the victim.