MITCHELL LEWIS: defended himself in a murder case and won.

by HEATHER-LYNN EVANSON

MITCHELL KEN O'NEAL LEWIS created history yesterday.

He took on the island's judicial system, by himself, and won.

Lewis, 32, of Clifton Hill, St John, had spent the last four years in the High Court system fighting a murder charge hanging over his head since 2000.

He had been accused of murdering Troy "Teets Man" Walcott on June 8, that year. The prosecution contended Lewis shot Walcott in full view of other witnesses in Villa Road, Brittons Hill, St Michael, because Walcott stole his marijuana. In addition, the prosecution argued Lewis wrote his own four-page confession statement.

However, Lewis defended himself – a rarity in capital cases – and won.

Relief seemed to flood over Lewis as tears came to his eyes and his knees buckled. However, the handcuffs were quickly snapped back on and Lewis was led away since he is on remand for another matter.

Lewis' saga began in 2004 when he fired his first Community Legal Services appointed attorney. Over time, he parted company with Latchman Kissoon, Michael Lashley, Andrew Pilgrim, Ralph Thorne QC and Erskine Hinds.

He also tried to get his case shifted from before then Mr Justice Sherman Moore, saying comments made by that judge would prejudice any chance he had of a fair trial.

His case seemed to hit rock bottom when, in February 2005, a 12-member jury returned the opposite verdict of that rendered yesterday. It found him guilty of murder and now Justice of Appeal Moore sentenced him to hang.

Lewis challenged that decision in the Court of Appeal and that court overturned his death sentencing after ruling he did not have a fair trial.

However, in an unprecedented move, the island's chief prosecutor Director of Public Prosecutions Charles Leacock, QC, fought that Court of Appeal ruling at the Caribbean Court of Justice.

This time around before the High Court, Lewis indicated he was quite prepared to conduct his own defence.

And in the two-week trial, Lewis came with his sheaf of prepared questions, extensively cross-examined his witnesses and argued points of law. He also spent the entire day addressing the jury from another sheaf of papers.