Jury opts for least serious charge in knife attack
David Bodden
(CNS): A jury of three men and four women took less than three hours to find David Bodden not guilty of attempted murder or grievous bodily harm (GBH) but instead found him guilty of the lesser charge of unlawful wounding in relation to a daylight knife attack on Blake Barrell. After a morning of summing up the evidence and directing the jury, the Grand Court judge, Justice Charles Quin, told the jury that if they were not sure and had a reasonable doubt that Bodden intended to murder Barrell or cause him grievous harm, then they must find him not guilty of those charges.
The George Town man had faced three different charges for the same incident and the judge told the jury if they did not find intent but found Bodden was reckless in his actions when he cut the victim, then they should find him guilty of unlawful wounding.
Bodden’s conviction relates to a mid-day chase and stabbing incident in June of last year, when he attacked Barrell after spotting him on the road in George Town, not far from the Cayman Islands courthouse.
After several threats to his life and gunshots fired at his home, Bodden believed Barrel and another man wanted to kill him. He told the court that when he spotted Barrell he was an “emotional mess” and ran him off the road before a fight ensued. Despite cutting his throat, Bodden said he never intended to kill the man.
Following the verdict, Bodden was bailed to return to court again on 4 May for sentencing.
CNS Note: We would like to offer an apology to Justice Quin for an earlier reporting error and clarify that the judge did not state in his directions to the jury that they needed to be 100% certain in their consideration but that they needed to be sure beyond a reasonable doubt, as corrected.
These CNS posters prove that sometimes we should all stay in our lanes of life.
The simply reality is when faced with certain situations one cannot simply sit back and fearfully anticipate the execution of a real and demonstrated threat to one’s life.
No. Sometimes we have to take the fight to the agitator and let him know what is what.
I fully support D Bodden and the decision of the jury in this instance.
(Those who know the man know he is cool and calm on a regular basis – but like many in his / our circle … cross at your own peril.)
– Whodatis
Good to see Whodatis has added vigilante justice and throat slitters to his list of favourite causes.
OK bud.
However, others may regard it as protecting one’s family against gunmen.
To each his own though.
– Who
Good thing people like you arent on a jury because you would convict them based on your feelings, only then you would see the innocent in prison. Stop bad mouthing the judicial system because theyre only doing their jobs. Evidence is evidence and it is what it is, not defending this man but if you cant prove something why convict him of your feelings? It is what it is. Im slowly drifting away from reading any of CNS’s comments because I get pissed off basically everytime. And to the person who said must be a jury of “west bayers” is also one of those ignorant people that is from some part of this island that has no crime. Please people please your common sense and stop leaning on your own misunderstanding.
But anything past the four way stop should be cut off and drift away….
Maybe you should have been in mr burrels shoes
The man was fearing for his own life. The victim made threats with a gun attempting to kill him and he defended himself with a knife….I think the verdict was fair enough he just barked up the wrong tree.
A decision made by our own people. That’s what we have to accept. A blind man could see his intentions!
This verdict is quite alarming! What signal is this sending to those criminals that have attacked other human beings, thinking nothing of the victim’s life/lives and stabbing them or slashing their throat to their hearts content. Only to receive but a slap on the wrist. It is no wonder the thugs think it’s ok to act so violently. The very fact that he cut the victim’s throat was clear evidence of intending to seriously harm or kill him! Just awful and disappointing. Our justice system and the laws of the Cayman Islands are supposed to protect us but the victims are always punished by allowing their attackers to feel like they have all the rights. No weight is being given to these serious crimes and that’s why the court system is so jam packed with repeated incidents.
Another incredible decision by a Cayman jury. A man stabs another man in the neck. That is worth repeating, a man STABS another man IN THE NECK and the jury did not think he intend to cause “grevious harm” to him? WTF? Must be some West Bayers on the jury who think that a throat slash is really a mild warning.
You missed the part that he was on his way from the police station having reported the threats against him, accompanied by police, when he felt so fearful for his life that he decided to ram the other guys car, chase them down the street and then knife one of them. Methinks the identity and reputation of the victim had something to do with the verdict, rather than whether there was a reasonable doubt as to the intention to harm.
Seriously? He had a scalpel and sliced the other man’s throat!!! He ran the guy’s car off the road and then chased him until he caught up with him and then slit his throat open. This was in front of tons of witnesses of a law firm. Cayman justice strikes again!! SMH
Caymanian juries are a dream for criminals.
So in the Cayman Islands throat cutting does not equal an attempted murder. Sweet! If he had wanted to kill he would have put the scalpel in his left hand..WOW! His state of mind is an excuse???? Oh my!
If only you had been in court for all of the evidence you would fully understand why his attorney made that comment. She was able to show that the so called victim threatened him with a gun and then went to his work place and threatened him there again. He made over 10 calls to the police and spoke to them in person over 6 times before this incident. If you saw when he went into the station to report the incident he was distraught. They had been trying to kill him for a while before this incident and he just could t take it anymore. If you were in his shoes you would probably be dead. They probably would have killed you whilst you waited for the RCIPS to come take a statement. So good luck to Mr BODDEN may good people always have the guts to defend themselves.
another day of cayman wonderland justice…..