Jamaica’s chief prosecutor Paula Llewellyn, King’s Counsel, has moved to clarify her actions before the decision made by then Supreme Court Justice Lennox Campbell during the 2014 murder trial of entertainer Vybz Kartel and his co-accused to continue the matter after he became aware of an attempt to bribe the 12-member jury to acquit the men.

While noting that the matter is still under judicial consideration, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Paula Llewellyn said she felt compelled to speak on that “narrow issue” in light of what she labelled “a campaign” of “misinformation being spread by certain counsel” which she believes amounts to an attempt to bring her office “into disrepute”.

“I think it is a veiled attempt to intimidate the office of the DPP and myself from doing our professional duty in respect of properly preparing ourselves to make submissions to the Court of Appeal in this matter, as we are bound to do consequent on the ruling of the Privy Council in this matter,” the DPP told the
Jamaica Observer on Sunday.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council last Thursday quashed the murder convictions of Adidja “Vybz Kartel” Palmer and his co-accused Shawn “Shawn Storm” Campbell, Kahira Jones, and Andre St John for the 2011 murder of Clive “Lizard” Williams and remitted the question of whether there should be a retrial to Jamaica’s Appeal Court.

The law lords, in their ruling, said the decision by the original trial judge to continue the murder trial after the attempted bribe of the jury had been brought to his attention “gave rise to a miscarriage of justice”.

Lord Lloyd-Jones, in delivering the ruling, said the board was of the view that the tainted juror should not have been kept on the jury.

“There was a need to isolate the other members of the jury from the source of contamination. In the board’s view, allowing Juror X to continue to serve on the jury is fatal to the safety of the convictions which followed. This was an infringement of the defendants’ fundamental right to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial court in accordance with Section 16 of Chapter III of the Jamaican Constitution,” he stated.

Commenting further on the issue, Lord Lloyd-Jones said, while the board is “mindful of the very serious consequences which may flow from having to discharge a jury shortly before the end of a long and complex criminal trial, it is also very conscious of the danger of deliberate attempts to derail criminal trials, in particular in their closing stages, by engineering situations in which it becomes necessary to discharge the jury”.

On Sunday, Llewellyn said contrary to the picture being painted that she had full sway in the matter, the opinion she rendered to the judge was at his invitation; a situation which, she said, is not novel, as judges from time to time in the course of matters request the opinion of the head of the ODPP, even though she might not be the one handling the particular case.

“I have been made to understand that they have been saying that I somehow breached the constitution by indicating that we didn’t have a problem with the matter going ahead after it was brought to the judge’s attention that [there was] this tainted juror. There are 50-odd lawyers who operate on behalf of the DPP, but under the constitution the DPP is able to step into any case, at any time, in the interest of justice, and neither the prosecutor who was there before; the judge, nor defence counsel can prevent that, it is a constitutional power,” Llewellyn pointed out.

“An opinion was canvassed from everybody (defence and prosecuting counsel) but the judge, who is supreme in the law, was the one who made the decision, weighing all the different factors, because he, too, would have been aware that previously a juror had to be discharged because she was put in a situation where it was quite clear she would not have been able to continue,” the DPP said.

She said up until the day in question when the judge requested that she appear in chambers along with the defence team and her team of prosecutors
— Senior Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Jeremy Taylor and then Crown Counsel Leighton Morris
— she would speak to the prosecutors every day and assist administratively or otherwise to prepare for the challenges they would face from day to day.

“Every now and again I would pop into court for a few minutes to build up morale because the case was very stressful, not only for the prosecutors but the police and the entire office, for reasons I would not go into,” Llewellyn stated.

On the day Justice Campbell summoned her, she said after hearing from the judge and the foreman, who was called and questioned, the two teams of attorneys were asked to say what their opinions were.

“The attorneys for the defence were saying they didn’t think the matter should go on. I indicated we wouldn’t have a difficulty with the matter proceeding. We were saying 60-odd days have passed and it was a very serious matter, and the judge could always issue further and detailed instructions to the jury in addition to the general instructions. He really wanted an opinion from us, and I indicated that we would not have a problem with him proceeding and that any risk for a decision coming down that would be adverse to us, we are the ones who would handle that risk,” Llewellyn said.

According to the DPP, the issue at hand was of sufficient import for the judge to request the conference of attorneys.

“There was another issue with the same juror [who offered the bribe] who somehow found himself at the chambers of one of the attorneys in the case and the attorney came and reported it to the court and then you had this [attempt to bribe]. What is the likelihood of having three issues to do with a jury in one case of this nature? I have never seen it happen, and I expect the judge, with all his experience, had never seen it either, which is why he had to have an enquiry in an abundance of caution. I think he thought it would be the best thing,” she said.

“He could either have said to the attorneys from my chambers, ‘consult with the director and tell me what her opinion is’, but in light of the peculiar nature of this matter he thought it better to send for me so I could hear exactly what the foreman had to say,” the DPP said further.

Added Llewellyn: “It is unfortunate that counsel has sought to spread misinformation and seek to be mischievous and foment misunderstanding on this area, and I can only hope it is not in an effort to intimidate me or my office. They must be so careful that in being so irresponsible and spreading this sort of misinformation that it does not act as an adverse factor which undermines our security at the office of the DPP. We are career prosecutors and we have no vested interest in any case.”

In April 2014, Kartel was sentenced to life in prison with the eligibility of parole after serving 35 years of his sentence. His co-accused were also handed life sentences
— with Shawn Storm and Jones being eligible for parole after serving 25 years, and St John being eligible after serving 15 years.

In April 2020, following an appeal, the men’s parole times were reduced by two-and-a-half years each.

In September that same year the men were granted conditional leave to challenge their murder convictions before the Privy Council.