Advertisement 87
Advertisement 248
Chantae James

Chante James spent one week in jail for her crime and was ordered to pay a fine of EC$5,000. (iWN photo)

Advertisement 219

The Old Montrose woman charged with wounding a Community College student with a knife in Paul’s Avenue, Kingstown, earlier this year will spend the next week in jail while awaiting her sentencing.

After announcing a guilty plea today (Friday), Senior Magistrate Rickie Burnett ordered that Chantae James be remanded in custody for one week while he decides her sentence.

In finding the woman guilty, the magistrate rejected her claim that she acted in self defence when she used a knife on Sakaina John during an altercation in Paul’s Avenue, Kingstown on March 28.

John, a Community College student who was dressed in her uniform at the time, had to get sutures to close slit lips and a cut to her cheek.

And while James tried to portray John as the aggressor, she, like John, told the court that John dropped the knife after wresting it from her.

Advertisement 21

The court heard that the two women became friends on social media after James sent John a friend request on Instagram, which John accepted.

Sometime after, they had an online altercation over John’s boyfriend at the time, who was James’ ex-boyfriend.

The altercation included John posting to social media a topless photo of James.

John, however, had blocked out James’ face before posting the image.

The court heard that one week before the altercation in which John was wounded, James had accosted her at her school, but John had ignored James and walked away.

Sakaina John Chantae James
Sakaina john, left, the virtual complainant, and chantae james, who has been convicted of wounding. (iwn photos)

The wounding incident occurred when John and one of her friends and schoolmates, Jézell Prescott, were walking through Paul’s Avenue on their way to John’s mother’s workplace at Stoney Ground for lunch.

Burnett said he could not arrive at a conclusion of self defence in the matter.

The magistrate said he could not see why a knife had to be used.

He said the state of mind of the defendant at the time of the crime was established, when she told Justice of Peace Renwick Baynes of Diamond Estate, who had intervened in the altercation, that John had threatened her, so she (James) came prepared for her (John).

The magistrate said that the force used by James was extremely excessive, adding that even after wounding the complainant, James, on seeing John bleeding, accused her of being AIDS positive and cautioned John against causing her blood to touch her (James).

After the magistrate’s comments, the prosecutor, Police Constable Corlene Samuel told the court that the defendant had no previous convictions.

Defence counsel, Carlos James, then rose to mitigate, but the magistrate told him he could choose to do so then or next Friday, Sept. 21, when James will be sentenced.

The lawyer opted to mitigate just before the sentencing.

Advertisement 128

16 replies on “Woman found guilty of wounding college student”

  1. This was one of those cases where the defendant should have preserved her right to remain silent. Her defence was very detrimental to her case and the verdict was obvious.

    Poor judgment call if the decision to put the defendant on the stand was on the part of her Counsel.

  2. Vince lawyer whether or not she was out on the stand or not would not change the verdict. The jury would have still found her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence was overwhelming.

    1. What jury for a magistrate case?

      Learn the court system. This was not a High Court matter.

      The magistrate was the one who pronounced the verdict.

  3. Vince lawyer you are are moron at the highest level parading as a lawyer. How is the average person will know it’s not a a high court matter? Is it not a criminal offense? Than the the average prudent person will believe it is a high court matter. So what is your point?

    1. Moron???

      The article clearly stated Magistrate. Where do Magistrates sit?

      If you’re going to call me out, as you did in the first place by mentioning my online name, please ensure you come correct. A simple google search will suffice.

      The average prudent person will either fact check or ask for clarity!!!!

      Now who’s the moron?

      Que lastima!!!

    2. Further, let me add: criminal offences are also heard in the Serious Offences Court by the Chief Magistrate and the Kingstown Magistrate Court by the Senior Magistrate. These courts are normally the first case for the hearing of criminal offences. In some cases, in charges of murder for example, if following a preliminary inquiry, and the Magistrate has found sufficient evidence that there is a case to be tried, this case will then go to the High Court.

      PS: Jose, parading as a lawyer didn’t help me to explain all of that to you. Years of practice and experience did!

      Next time, feel free to ask and once I have knowledge of the answers, I will do my best to respond to your queries 🙂

  4. Vince lawyer you have a self righteous attitude. You are always short on specifics. You sometime criticized Kenton’s reporting style , however. You hide when asked to provide your own suguesting to improve reader’s understanding.

    1. Hide? Self righteous lol…ok then.

      Others who sought clarity have received it, especially when my online name is used.

      Show me where I have provided incorrect legal advice?

      I will wait!!!

  5. Vince lawyer I read your explanation with respect to the different layers of our court system. However, this is not the way the court system is structured in Canada . If you commit a crime it goes straight to the high court, then when a verdict is given and you are not satisfied you go to the Court of Appeal. The Superior Court is the last avenue, you will have to ask for leave to pursue that last option. Indeed in St Vincent it structured differently and that’s okay.

    1. Of course, court systems world wide are structured differently. This is a fact. What the writers above have sought to do is call me derogatory names etc. instead of having educated dialogue like you just did. My initial comment did not attack or refer to anyone’s comments.

      However, while I’m open to everyone’s entitlement to have an opinion, I wont be quiet if someone comes at me. Unlike them, I can respond armed with knowledge

Comments are closed.