By LAMECH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

ljohnson@tribunemedia.net

MOMENTS before the man accused of Stephen Sherman’s “execution” testified that he did not kill the banker, his alleged accomplices walked free of the charges they faced concerning the incident on the judge’s direction to the jury.

Justice Roy Jones, upon the jury’s 10:40am entrance into court yesterday, ordered the jury to return a unanimous not guilty verdicts for 44-year-old widow Renee Sherman and 22-year-old Cordero Bethell due to legal reasons.

The Tribune understands that those legal reasons stemmed from the two-week legal discussions in the jury’s absence that Justice Jones ruled on four days ago.

The forelady, as instructed, announced the 12-0 not guilty verdicts before the two were told by the judge that they were acquitted and discharged of the February 17, 2012 incident.

‘Rules To Follow’

Bethel was handcuffed and escorted away to a holding cell while Mrs Sherman left the Supreme Court flanked by two of her relatives who were thanking “God” for the outcome.

While Mrs Sherman declined to comment on anything related to the proceedings, her lawyer, who also represented Bethel and is currently defending Farrington, spoke to The Tribune on the verdict handed down on the judge’s direction.

“The response is simply this; justice is every man being given his due, and that there is fair play, and there are rules to follow,” Murrio Ducille said.

“The judge did what was proper because the prosecution has to establish their case beyond a reasonable doubt and obviously they have not done that so everything seems to be in order.”

“It’s quite proper what has transpired,” he added.

When asked what was next for Mrs Sherman, the attorney said, “I wouldn’t know, you’d have to speak with her about that I’m just the lawyer.”

“But I’m sure she has to go and get her life in order...together. It’s over a year now that her life has been disrupted, so I’m sure she has to go and put everything in place.”

‘Human Error’

Yesterday’s outcome did not sit well with relatives of Mr Sherman who expressed their dissatisfaction that the persons they firmly believe plotted their loved one’s murder walked free.

Greg Sherman, speaking on behalf of the family, said: “we’re very dissatisfied with the outcome of the case.”

“We’re 100 per cent certain that Renee Sherman planned to murder my brother. All of the evidence is there, but I’m shocked to find out that the evidence was not allowed to be entered for the jury to hear.”

“It hurts me,” he admitted, claiming that the defence attorney only spoke to matters involving the police, but not the “crux of the case.”

“It’s very sad, you know? You’re going to throw out a statement, a full confession, over three and a half hours because the officer forgot – human error – forgot to put the time the actual interview started? My God man something is wrong with that.”

The brother of the deceased concluded that there was no consolation for the family that the last of three accused was still standing trial in connection with the murder.

Case History and ‘Confession’

Mr Sherman, an assistant manager at the Royal Bank of Canada in Palmdale, was shot in the head when he pulled up to his Yamacraw Shores home on the evening of February 17, 2012.

He was robbed of his cell phone before being shot. His niece, who was in the car with him, was also robbed.

His wife, and 22-year-olds Janaldo Farrington and Cordero Bethel, both of Pinewood Gardens, were charged with conspiring to commit murder.

Farrington and Bethel were together charged with his murder and the two armed robberies while the widow was charged with aiding and abetting the murder of her husband. All three denied the charges.

With yesterday’s acquittal of the widow and Bethel, only Farrington was left to answer to the charges against him because of an alleged confession he gave to police on February 24, 2012.

According to the alleged statement Farrington gave to Sgt 527 Basil Evans, he was contacted by his cousin “Timer” who informed him that a woman was ordering a hit on her husband “because he used to beat her and he had a big insurance.”

The homicide detective claimed that Farrington told him that he gave the man instructions and when Sherman got on his knees, he shot him in the back of the head before running back to a waiting vehicle and driving off.

However, Mr Ducille suggested to the detective that they brutalised his client in order to get him to sign the statement.

‘I didn’t kill anyone’

In yesterday’s proceedings, Farrington elected to give sworn evidence in his defence after his attorney told the jury that his client had no obligation to prove anything.

Farrington began his testimony by recalling the day he was taken into police custody, February 24, 2012.

“I was at the house with my sisters out Carmichael Road,” he said.

He said DEU officers came there, arrested him, took him to two residences before taking him to the Drug Enforcement Unit.

Farrington said that 15 minutes later, three police officers, one he knew by name and the others by face, took him to the Central Detective Unit through a side entrance.

Farrington claimed that instead of being booked in, he was taken upstairs and placed in a room with a number of officers.

He named officer Brown, Corporal Evans and ASP Fernander, but said there were six in total, including Sgt Evans.

Farrington claimed that while being handcuffed behind his back, Sgt Evans told him to sign the statement and when he refused to do so without an lawyer present, he was struck in the chest with a handcuff.

The accused said the officer put ammonia in a fishbag, shook it and poured it out before placing it over his head in order to get him to sign the statement.

After a second, a longer experience of being suffocated, Farrington claimed he did what officers told him to do and signed the statement.

Farrington said his eyes were “watery”, he was a little  dizzy and had difficuty breathing as a result of the experience.

Mr Ducille asked his client if he was fed while in police custody that day. Farrington said he was not offered a meal until the next morning.

Farrington said he made complaints of the brutality he faced when seen by a physician at Her Majesty’s Prison four days later and was prescribed pain killers.

“Did you kill anyone. sir?” Mr Ducille asked.

“No, sir,” Farrington answered.

‘Cold Hearted Killer’

In cross-examination, prosecutor Sandradee Gardiner asked the accused if he was informed why he was being arrested.

“No, ma’am,” Farrington replied.

“You heard 1774 Johnson, he said he advised you of your right to counsel,” the prosecutor suggested.

“He never told me of my rights, but I signed a document,” he said.

“You didn’t read it?” the prosecutor asked.

“He wasn’t allowing me to read it,” he answered.

“Did you ask him to let you read it?” prosecutor Gardiner asked.

“No, ma’am,” the accused man said.

The prosecutor suggested to him that he signed the document because he was advised of his rights. Farrington denied the suggestion.

“When did you become aware that you were not arrested for drugs?” the prosecutor asked.

Farrington said it was the night his lawyer came to see him when he was told the reason for his arrest and said he was booked in at CDU despite what a policeman said in court.

He also denied being offered a meal by Officer Pratt upon his entrance to CDU.

When asked what happened after the interview room, Farrington said officers took him into another room where he was left with a policeman before being left alone.

“How was your breathing?” the prosecutor asked.

“I wasn’t breathing good, but I could breathe,” he answered.

The prosecutor asked the accused if he complained of the brutality once he was sent to the Carmichael Road police station, and he said no.

“Did they mistreat you at Carmichael Road station?” the prosecutor asked.

“No, ma’am,” he said.

Prosecutor Gardiner asked the accused if he complained to the lawyer of the pain he was experiencing at that time.

“No, I didn’t tell him I was in pain,” the accused said, adding that his lawyer was a doctor and therefore could not help him at that time.

Farrington, however, admitted that he knew his lawyer was responsible for ensuring his rights were protected.

“Did you tell anyone other than the prison doctor?” the prosecutor asked. Farrington said no.

Gardiner asked the accused if he understood that he had a right to remain silent and not sign anything and he said, “yes.”

His alleged statement to police was put to him, but he denied giving a statement and said he was forced to sign.

The prosecutor suggested that he went to Yamacraw because his cousin wanted him to do a “wibe” he denied knowing what it meant and the prosecutor’s reference to the word “tool” for a gun.

“You took on that job and you thought you were going to get a payment that was going to come from insurance upon the death of Stephen Sherman,” the prosecutor further suggested. Farrington denied this.

“You forced him to go to the side of his house, forced him to his knees and executed him,” prosecutor Gardiner suggested.

“No, ma’am,” the accused said.

“And you executed him by planting a bullet in his head with a gun,” the prosecutor further suggested. Farrington denied this, and the other suggestions that he left Mr Sherman to die because he wanted “your share of the insurance money.”

“You have a conscience?” the prosecutor asked.

“Yes, I think we all do,” the accused retorted.

“At the time you were arrested, did you feel sorry for what you did?” Farrington was asked. The accused said he only felt sorry because he didn’t know what he was being arrested for.

“Why you feeling sorry? You ain’t do nothing?” she said, before asking him if he expected the court to believe the police conspired the investigation and “chose you to pin a murder on?”

“Yes, ma’am,” the accused said.

“I’m going to suggest to you, you’re a cold hearted killer,” the prosecutor said. “No, ma’am,” Farrington replied.

Farrington was asked by the jury where he was on the evening of the incident and he said “I don’t recall.”

He was also asked if he made a complaint to the magistrate of the alleged brutality. Farrington said he did not.

The trial concludes on Monday, October 7, with closing submissions to the jury by counsel in the case.