Former policeman loses appeal against rape and abduction convictions

The Court of Appeal has upheld the convictions and prison sentences of Craig Williams, the former policeman found guilty in 2021 of abducting and raping a 17-year-old girl in St Thomas.

In a judgment delivered on February 13, the court dismissed Williams’ application for permission to appeal, ruling that the evidence against him was "ample" and "credible". The appeal was heard on February 10.

Williams, who was a constable at the time, was convicted in October 2021 for illegal possession of a firearm, forcible abduction, and rape. The following month, he was sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment for the gun offence, five years for the abduction and 15 years for rape, with a stipulation that he serve at least 10 years before becoming eligible for parole.

The sentences were ordered to run concurrently, meaning he will serve a maximum of 15 years. His name was ordered placed on the Sex Offender’s Registry.

The case stemmed from an incident on the night of December 29, 2012, in St Thomas. The 17-year-old girl had testified at the trial that she was walking along the Yallahs main road after midnight when Williams approached her in a vehicle. After showing her a police identification card and promising to take her to a police station, she entered his car. She said she told Williams that her aunt had put her out and that she had also been raped earlier that night

But instead of a station, Williams drove the teenager to a secluded, bushy track, according to the judgment.

The girl told the trial court that Williams brandished a firearm and threatened to shoot her if she did not comply with his demands for sexual intercourse. Following the assault, he gave her $100 for bus fare and let her out at a bus stop. While at the location, it came out in court that a police patrol team drove up but Williams left the car, with the girl inside, to talk with the police team, reportedly saying he was there with his "catty".

Williams, who was convicted in the Gun Court, challenged the verdict on the grounds that it was "against the weight of the evidence".

His attorney, Lawrence Haynes, argued that the trial judge failed to properly analyse conflicts in the girl's testimony, specifically regarding the vehicle's mechanics and her claim that she could not leave the vehicle after Williams had gone to talk with the police patrol team.

The defense pointed to testimony from a police witness who stated the car's doors and windows were manually operated, contradicting the complainant’s description of "buttons". They further argued that if the complainant had been screaming as she claimed, a nearby police patrol should have heard her.

The lawyer also argued that the trial judge did not properly consider evidence from witnesses called by Williams, including a former cop who was dismissed from the force because of a gun-related conviction.

The Court of Appeal acknowledged that the trial judge’s original summation was "notably concise" and lacked detailed analysis. "The learned judge did not indicate the reasoning by which he arrived at his decision. There was also no detailing of his findings of fact, nor any explanation of the evidential basis for those findings. Further, he identified no conflicts within the evidence and provided no explanation of how such conflicts were resolved," said the court.

The appeal was heard by appeal court President Justice McDonald-Bishop, Justice Simmons, and acting appellate judge Carolyn Tie Powell.

They, however, concluded that "whilst the summation leaves much to be desired, the learned trial judge demonstrated that he understood the essential ingredients for the various offences for which the applicant was tried".

The court ruled that the technicalities of the car door were "peripheral issues".

Justice Tie Powell, who wrote the opinion, noted that because the interior handle of the passenger door was missing, the complainant would have been unable to open the door regardless of whether the locking mechanism was manual or electronic.

The court also found her explanation - that the patrol officers were too far away to hear her screams - to be "plausible".

The court highlighted that Williams' own unsworn statement at trial was "brief and bare" and "silent" on any of the specific allegations put forward by the prosecution.

Regarding the abduction, the appeal court said the girl's testimony was consistent under cross-examination, including denying that she told him to drive slowly so they could talk. The court said Williams remained silent on these points and therefore "it cannot be said that the verdict of guilt was against the weight of the evidence or that it was unreasonable".

By contrast, the appeal judges said the complainant was described as a "truthful and credible witness" whose account was not "materially shaken" during cross-examination.

The Court of Appeal refused Williams’ application for leave to appeal both conviction and sentence, affirming that the sentences would run at the same time starting from November 15, 2021 when they were imposed.

The prosecution was represented by Natallie Malcolm and Andrene Hutchinson.

Follow The Gleaner on X, formerly Twitter, and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at onlinefeedback@gleanerjm.com or editors@gleanerjm.com.