[2014] UKPC 7 JCPC 2012/0077 Ramdeen (Appellant) v The State (Respondent) Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the convictions of the two appellants where there were inadequacies in his directions to the jury and the case rested primarily on the evidence of an accomplice given immunity from prosecution. Carlos Phillip (the deceased) was murdered on 23 December 2003. His body was found bound and gagged in a pond by a roadside two days later. He had died as a result of multiple stab wounds to the neck and aspiration of blood and stomach contents. Miss Ramdeen (the first appellant) was arrested a month later and gave a statement to police in which she admitted killing the deceased at her apartment after he had made sexual advances towards her and been violent. She said she had hit him with a brick and then tied him up before stabbing him to death. She said she had been assisted in disposing of the body by two men, Zye and Bruazal. Bruazal gave a statement implicating the first appellant and a man called 'Dave' (whom he says was the second appellant), alleged to be the first appellant's boyfriend, whom he had got to know for a few days prior to the 23 December 2003. His version was that he had gone to the apartment with Dave with a plan for the first appellant to entice the deceased over so that the two men could steal his car keys from him and take his car. Whilst carrying out this plan Bruazal and the appellants had hit him with a brick but Dave and the first appellant had gone further and Dave had killed Mr Phillip. Bruazal gave evidence against the appellants under an immunity deal and both were convicted of murder and sentenced to death. The Board unanimously dismisses Ms Ramdeen's appeal against conviction.

• published: 27 Mar 2014
• views: 1240