Jury To Deliberate: Attempted Murder

March 10, 2011

marico-bassett[Updated] This morning [Mar.10] in Supreme Court Justice Greaves summed up the Marico Bassett shooting case. After directing the jury, Justice Greaves said that a key issue in this trial was the matter of identification. He said that the jury must ask the question: “Has the complainant identified the defendant?”

He said that the jury must satisfy itself that the Crown has clearly identified Marico Bassett, 20, as the person who was the person who shot Randy Lightbourne. He cautioned the jury that they must consider all the evidence that they had heard in Court before they reach their verdict.

In his summing up, Justice Greaves reviewed the three charges. Count One was a charge of attempted murder. Count Two was a charge of using a firearm to commit an indictabke offence. Count Three was a charge of unlawfully possessing ammunition.

Justice Greaves pointed out that a guilty verdict on Count One must also result in a guilty verdict on Count Two as these two were inextricably linked. He said that Count three was separate and that Jurors might find a not guilty or guilty verdict and that this had no direct bearing on Counts One and Two as the act of unlawful possession might not – in law and in this case – be directly connected to Counts One and Two.

The case will be put in the jury’s hands this afternoon. The ten woman two man jury will continue deliberating until a verdict is reached.

Randy Lightbourne, 45, previously told the jury that he had recognised Mr. Bassett when the alleged gunman rode a motorcyle into the parking lot of Somerset’s Charing Cross Tavern at approximately 5pm on July 23, 2010 and began shooting at him.

Mr. Lightbourne, who was shot 7 times, spent months recovering from wounds to his arm, abdomen and buttocks. Mr. Bassett, 20, was taken into custody soon after the shooting and charged with attempting to murder Mr. Lightbourne in July 2010, only days after the shooting. During the trial, the jury heard that the gun used was linked to multiple West End shootings — including last month’s murder of Colford Ferguson,

During the trial, Crown counsel Carrington Mahoney said the defendant allegedly shot Mr Lightbourne to “move up the ranks” of a west end gang he was said to be a member of.

Update 4:57pm: The jury came back at around 4:40pm, and had not reached a verdict on any of the three counts. They were sent back to deliberate.

Update 6:05pm: The jury is still deliberating.

Update 6:45pm: Jury has come back, with no verdict on two counts. Mr Bassett was found guilty on one charge, but will be retried on the attempted murder charge. Details here.

Share via email

Read More About

Category: All, Court Reports, Crime, News

Comments (11)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Truth says:

    If he is proven guilty, is it likely that the crown will also seek to prosecute him on the other muders that the weapon is linked to?

    Are there any legal beagles on here that can advise as to the chances of this?

    • blackbeard de pirate says:

      no because they have already arrested/charged the person responsible for the first murder and Basset was already in jail when the recent murder happened. I hope the police find that gun quickly.

  2. bermudian says:

    I hope he gets a not guilty verdict!

    • Truth says:

      Even if he is guilty?

      • Tony says:

        Of the recent murder / attempted murder trials this appears to be the weakest in terms of conclusive evidence..

      • Real Deal says:

        Mr. Lightbourne or The Legend as everyone in the under World knows him is trying play the innocent card. He not talking about how other things I can say on here. After the trial he’ll be sent to London under witness protection………..and we fool Tax Payers will be paying for it.

        Ask anyone who’s been to West Gate, who he is, what things he’s done. The truth would surprise you!!!!

        So I also agree the young Soldier should get the not guilty verdict.

        • SOMERSET OG says:

          @Real Deal! Two wrongs don’t make a right and Randy did his time and was going the straight and narrow. Your logic is crazy! Did he do something to you? If not why would you want to see him hurt or killed and think it serves him right? If your logic was the way of the world then Marico has something violent coming his way too. What if Randy was your brother or father? What did he do that was that bad? These little buggers are way worse. Killing innocent people over mistaken identity. Whoever they were trying to kill will be the next victim when they catch him. Your boys! Are you proud of them? Do you want your children to be like them?

          • #imjustsayin says:

            @SOMERSET OG the only WRONG trying to seem RIGHT is ya mate RANDY!!! He was going straight and narrow or are you trying to say he was straight and narrow?? I CAN’T TELL. In my opinion YOUR LOGIC is beyond Crazy!!! And for all that Randy has done in his time he deserved more than what he got.

            @Real Deal u can say it again. WHO HE REALLY IS AND WHAT HE IS REALLY ABOUT!!!! You’re on point with “the TRUTH” suprising them. If they send him off to the UK that would be some BS. He aint got no other way to get out. And if they do it for him they better do it for every other convicted crimanal on parole after being handed a life sentence.

  3. US Observer says:

    Have the police captured the weapon? I haven’t read or heard anything about the weapon and whether they were able to obtain fingerprints.

    There was one witness to the shooting who could identify the shooter by name…Randy Lightbourne. In most cases, people will not identify someone by name unless they were absolutely sure.

  4. this case is weak says:

    @ truth if they tried to link him their case would be as weak no weaker then this one and wasnt he under remand when culford got shot? if so impossible all they have proof of is he possed ammunition. so count 3: guilty but one and two in my opinon is not enough you have the testimony of a partially bilnd man in his left eye who was running and rolling while being shot seven times who claims he recognized the nose and the mouth of the shooter put is 100% posistive. **weak** all they can prove is he had touched a gun or had been around the gun or area where a gun had recently been fired. you dnt have to shoot a gun personally in order to have traces of gsr on your person it can be transfered.

  5. T Walker says:

    The only “evidence” they have is the victim’s claim that it was the defendant that shot him. All other evidence is circumstantial. Since gunshot residue is transferable he could have picked it up from anywhere; including from shooting in another incidence (i.e. target shooting, practice, etc.). I don’t know if they did, but I wish that the defense attorney would have asked the expert “how much residue is likely to be found on an individual that discharged that many bullets;” just to give the jury more to go on. The victim stating that he recognized the defendant under a visor while he was being shot seems quite far-fetched if he was busy trying to hide behind his bike, not to mention being blind in one eye. These give reasonable doubt and are there for inconclusive if you ask me to support a guilty verdict. The third count is the only count that they really have an grounds to find him guilty on. All else is a rush to judgment. I by no means support gun violence, but I would hate to see the police get so over zealous in trying to combat gun violence that they don’t give each case a more thorough investigation.