The Queen v Jay Marie Chin
| Jurisdiction | Antigua and Barbuda |
| Judge | FLOYD, J |
| Judgment Date | 23 February 2012 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [2012] ECSC J0223-1 |
| Court | High Court (Antigua) |
| Docket Number | CRIMINAL CASE NO: ANUHCR2011/0031 |
| Date | 23 February 2012 |
THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
CRIMINAL CASE NO: ANUHCR2011/0031
Mr. Adlai Smith and Ms. Shannon Jones for the Crown
Mr. Cosbert Cumberbatch, Mr. John Fuller and Mr. Charlesworth Brown for the Defendant
The defendant, Jay Marie Chin, was convicted by a jury on November 11, 2011 of murder, contrary to common law. This concluded a trial that began on October 25, 2011. The defendant was convicted of the murder of Raymond Chin, her former husband. The incident occurred on November 28, 2009 in the parish of Saint John.
At the time of conviction, Mr. Smith, learned counsel for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), gave verbal notice of his intention to seek the death penalty. This was followed by the filing of a formal notice on November 21, 2011. This court therefore ordered the production of a social investigation report and a psychiatric report to assist in the sentencing of the defendant.
On January 18, 2012, the ODPP filed notice formally withdrawing the application to seek the death penalty. As a result, the order for a psychiatric report was rescinded by this court. Notwithstanding that, a psychiatric report was produced by Dr. James A. King and submitted on February 16, 2012. The report was not, however, referred to at the sentencing hearing and Dr. King was not called as a witness.
A social investigation report dated January 12, 2012 prepared by Probation Officer (P/O) Irvin Henry was received by this court and copies were distributed to the ODPP and defence counsel.
At the sentencing hearing of February 17, 2012, the Crown called P/O Henry to present his social investigation report. The Crown also called Ms. Melvena Watson, the mother of the deceased. No witnesses were called on behalf of the defendant.
Jay Marie Chin was bom in Antigua and Barbuda but moved to the USA at an early age. She met Raymond Chin in 2001 while they both were living in the USA. They were married in 2004.
In 2002, the defendant started a business in St. John's, Antigua selling small household and personal items. The couple resided in Miami, Florida and when they travelled from the USA to Antigua, they would bring stock for the store with them. The defendant would often remain working in the shop in St. John's while Raymond Chin returned to Florida. From time to time, Mr. Chin would purchase and send items to the defendant for sale in the shop.
The couple divorced in June or July of 2009 but they continued to operate the store in Antigua which was known as Jay Chin's Top Notch Variety Store.
On November 28, 2009 at 5:13 PM, a 911 emergency operator received a call from a hysterical female saying that someone had just shot her husband. She said her name was Jay Chin and she gave her location.
Emergency medical personnel received a call between 5:00 PM and 5:30 PM to attend the Jay Chin Top Notch Variety Store on Upper Church Street. Upon arrival, they were directed by police into the building where they discovered a male on the floor bleeding. Due to the severity of his injuries, he was rapidly transported to hospital, where he was handed over to medical staff.
Dr. Terri-Ann Joseph treated Raymond Chin upon his arrival at hospital. He was suffering from multiple gunshot wounds to his chest and abdomen. He was bleeding profusely and was unconscious. He went into cardiac arrest and died shortly after arriving at the hospital.
An autopsy was performed on the deceased by pathologist Dr. Petra Miller-Nanton on December 2, 2009. She described a total of 13 gunshot entry wounds to the body. Most of the wounds indicated a trajectory of back to front and were on the right side of the body. Three wounds to the right forearm were described as defensive in nature. All of the wounds indicated the gun was 6 inches to 3 feet away from the victim when fired, placing it in the "intermediate to close range."
Dr. Miller-Nanton gave the cause of death as "multiple penetrating lung injuries and liver laceration consequent on multiple gunshot wounds." Forensic police officers examined the scene of the shooting and discovered many spent shell casings, bullet holes in the floor and bullet holes in the window shutters. Bullets were actually recovered from the floor and the shutters. The scene was analysed for fingerprints but none were found. Nothing appeared out of the ordinary in the shop and no signs of a struggle were present. A plastic container holding coins and small change was found behind the counter as was a knapsack bag which contained a camera, cell phone and keys. At the hospital, police found the victim's wallet and two rolls of cash in his pockets.
Forensic firearm examiner Graham Husbands identified 11 cartridge cases which were found at the scene as being .40 calibre Smith and Wesson type. They had all been fired from the same gun. He was also able to identify 6 pieces of metal recovered from the scene as deformed fired .40 calibre Smith and Wesson bullets.
A number of civilian and police witnesses testified to being in and around the vicinity of the Jay Chin shop, hearing what appeared to be gunshots and immediately looking in the direction of the sounds. There was sufficient light for the witnesses to clearly see the area. No one saw any person, other than the defendant, come out of the shop after the shots were fired.
The gun used to inflict the fatal wounds was never found by police. The Crown's case was essentially based on circumstantial evidence.
The defendant called 911 when the incident happened. She spoke to police shortly afterwards. She told police she and the deceased were working in the store that day. Before closing time, she went to the bathroom, which was in a separate building behind the shop. When she returned, she saw a man in a dark hooded shirt running away. She found Mr. Chin shot and lying on the shop floor. The motivation for the shooting appeared to be robbery, although police witnesses testified that the store was essentially undisturbed when they attended and the deceased had money in his pockets.
The defendant was subsequently interviewed again by police on more than one occasion and gave somewhat different versions of the events that day. She also spoke to friends and family and again her story differed. The differences centred around the reason she left the store to attend the bathroom building, what she heard there and what she saw after re-entering the shop.
Did she go to the bathroom building to use the toilet and lock it up, to use her cell phone or to get wipes for Mr. Chin's shoes? Did she hear the gunshots while in the bathroom building or not? Where and at what point did she see the man in the dark hooded shirt? These inconsistencies proved to be significant.
Prosecution witnesses testified that the relationship between the deceased and the defendant was over. Several witnesses testified that the couple had divorced but maintained an amicable relationship and had kept up the business in Antigua. However, the deceased had established a relationship with another woman, Dione Bucknor, and it appeared as though things were coming to an end between the defendant and the deceased prior to his violent death.
A social investigation report was prepared and presented by P/O Irvin Henry. It described the defendant as a 34 year old woman born in Antigua but who immigrated to the USA at age 9 in 1986. The defendant was married to the deceased for 5 years but they divorced a few months before his death. She described the relationship to P/O Henry in positive terms although trust and lifestyle issues led to the divorce. However, they remained in business together with the deceased assisting the defendant financially. The defendant has no children.
The defendant began working as a street vendor in St. John's in 2000. In 2008 she opened a shop on Church St. known as Jay Chin's Top Notch Variety Store. She had one employee. The business was her main source of income. The defendant continued to reside in the USA but attended her store four times per year staying at least a month on each visit. She was sometimes accompanied by Raymond Chin. On the date of the incident, her employee was away on vacation.
There is no criminal record or any antecedents for the defendant.
Members of the defendant's family and of the deceased's family were interviewed. The deceased was described by those who knew him as quiet and easy going. The defendant, on the other hand, was described as generous, affectionate and spirited but also determined, quick tempered and excitable. This changeable disposition was observed by P/O Henry during the two interviews he conducted with Ms. Chin. She presented as jovial and relaxed at one point, stern and dismissive at another. She demonstrated attitudinal highs and lows during the interviews.
It was apparent that although the defendant and the deceased continued to work together after their divorce, the defendant was reluctant to accept the end of the relationship. She failed to appear at the first and second divorce hearings, seeking to have the deceased reconsider his position. Ultimately, the divorce was processed and finalized at the third attempt.
In speaking of this offence, the defendant advised P/O Henry that she regrets the loss of life and is prepared to accept the court's decision. She has lost her husband and everything she has worked for.
At the sentencing hearing, the defendant spoke from the prisoner's dock and reiterated for the court her regret at the loss of the life of Raymond Chin. She said that it had been very hard for her.
The Crown also called Melvena Watson, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial