A man, who entered — soon after he was released from prison — the house of the woman, who he had attacked, resulting in the jail term, has been incarcerated again.
On Tuesday, at the Kingstown Magistrate’s Court, Senior Magistrate Rickie Burnett sent Kimmarley Douglas, 32, to prison for four years and two months for entering the home of Monique Hutchins.
The magistrate handed down the sentence shortly after finding Douglas guilty of a charge that on Jan. 22, he entered Hutchins’ Cane Garden home as a trespasser with intent to assault Hutchins, she being a woman therein.
When the trial commenced earlier this month,
Hutchins, an employed 46-year-old Cane Garden resident, told the court that she and Douglas had a relationship that ended a “long time” ago.
She said that on Jan. 22, a Friday, she slept out the night and went home after 3 a.m. the following morning.
Hutchins said that when she got home, she opened her door and went inside.
She said she turned on her phone light.
“All I hear, ‘Babes’,” Hutchins told the court.
She said that when she shone the light, she saw Douglas standing in front of her bed in her bedroom.
Hutchins said she asked him what he was doing in her house and told him to leave.
The complainant said that she was frightened when she saw Douglas and believes that he wanted to have sex with her.
She ran out of the house and started to scream, telling Douglas to leave the house.
Hutchins said that Douglas left the house, walked up the road, watching her “a kind ah way”, bad eye”.
She said that after he left, she went to the Criminal Investigation Department and filed a report.
Douglas took the stand in his own defence on Tuesday, the day on which the trial ended.
He told the court that on the night of Jan. 22, he was at Glenroy Edwards’ house in Rockies, where they played dominoes for money all through the night.
“And then that was it,” Douglas said in his evidence in chief.
During cross examination, prosecutor Police Sergeant Renrick Cato asked Douglas what was so special about Jan. 22 that he remembered it.
Douglas said that he only gambles on Friday nights.
The prosecutor put it to Douglas that he knew that there was an issue with the door at Hutchins house and how he could access the building in her absence.
Last Friday, the trial was adjourned, for a third time, to allow police to locate Edwards and another man, who Douglas said were his witnesses.
He had earlier given the police aliases, but later provided one full name and locations where the potential witnesses could be located.
When Edwards took the stand on Tuesday, even as the oath was being administered, the man said he did not know why he was in court.
After taking the oath, Edward told the court that he knows Douglas and that they are friends.
He said that he is also good friends with Hutchins.
Responding to Douglas’ question, Edwards told the court they had gambled around the clock one night but that he would not recall which night.
“Well, since he can’t recall, I have no further questions,” Douglas said.
During cross examination, Edwards said it was not true that they only gamble on Fridays, adding that sometimes, they also gamble all night on Sundays.
“All yesterday we were playing dominoes,” Edwards said.
He told the court that Douglas sometimes gambles on weekdays or weekends, and has no special days on which he gambles.
In handing down his verdict, Burnett said that he believed the evidence of the complainant.
When given two opportunities to mitigate on his own behalf, Douglas said he had nothing to say.
In his submission on sentencing, Cato noted that on Oct. 10, 2020, Douglas was jailed for 12 months for grievous bodily harm inflicted on Hutchins.
Douglas had been in prison since being charged, having not secured anyone to act as a surety.
The charges stemmed from a Dec. 8, 2019, attack in which Douglas left Hutchins with two broken arms.
He is alleged to have attacked Hutchins sometime before, reportedly beating her in the face and head with a hammer and chopping her about the body.
The prosecutor said that attacking Hutchins seems to be a trend for Douglas and that the court has a duty to protect its citizens.
“She had a relationship with him. To her, it is finished. It is high time the defendant accept that,” Cato said.
He said that based on the facts of the case, anything could have happened when Hutchins met Douglas in her house that night.
“The defendant knows that the virtual complainant lives alone and goes and comes back at a certain time,” he said.
The prosecutor noted that Douglas had addressed Hutchins as “babes”, even though he knew they were no longer together.
Cato noted that the maximum sentence for Douglas’ crime is seven years in prison.
“Let the defendant understand the seriousness of his actions. The sentence must cause the defendant to know the virtual complainant does not want him anymore. Maybe the last sentence was too short,” the prosecutor told the court.
In handing down his sentence, the magistrate said he had considered the seriousness and consequences of Douglas’s actions as well as the aggravating and mitigating features of the offender and the offence.
Burnett said that burglary with intent is a serious offence, adding that the complainant had suffered emotional distress, having suffered previously at Douglas’ hands.
He said there was a risk of actual injury to Hutchins and damage to her property.
The senior magistrate said that Douglas appeared to show no remorse and rejected two opportunities to mitigate on his own behalf.