matter on 28 October 1983, the final day of the trial, when he allegedly told Mr. Collins that it was too late to act. shot Mr. Johnson without provocation, no plausible motive for the killing could be advanced. The inference to be drawn from the prosecution’s case was that Mr. Collins had sought to buy a car from a third party via the victim, and that he shot Mr. Johnson to avoid paying the balance of the amount owed for the car. Throughout the proceedings, the author maintained that C. E. himself had committed the crime, and that he used the author’s service weapon after removing it from the author’s apartment, Mr. Collins further asserts that he never thought of not honouring his debt towards the deceased and maintains that the balance was paid pursuant to an agreement which he had arranged for his bank manager to prepare. The bank manager, D. A., confirmed this version during the first trial. 2.9 Finally, the author indicates that one other witness who would have been able to provide credible testimony to the effect that C. E. was the murderer and had in fact used the author’s service weapon for the killing, was prepared to give evidence on his behalf during the second trial. This witness himself states that he was available to give evidence during the first trial, but was prevented from doing so by Detective G. and C. E., who threatened to kill him and his family if he were to testify in court. As a result, this witness moved to a remote. part of Jamaica. When he returned to Spanish Town, he was assaulted by a group of individuals which included C. E. In the circumstances, the witness did not attend the re-trial. 2.6 During the trial in January 1982, several witnesses, including members of the author’s family, testified on the author’s behalf, confirming that he was at home when the victim was believed to have been shot. Five of the twelve days of the trial were devoted to testimony of defence witnesses. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury was unable to return a verdict. The author was ordered to be retried and remanded in custody. 2.10 On 28 October 1983, the author was found guilty as charged and sentenced to death. He states that his re-trial only lasted five days because none of the witnesses who were called to give evidence on his behalf during the first trial were called to do so at the re-trial. He blames this on the actions of his counsel, H. C., and of Detective G. In this context, he notes that his counsel mentioned to him that he did not wish the trial to proceed beyond Friday 28 October, as he had other professional obligations to attend to in another part of the country at the beginning of the following week. The author further notes that the jury was sent out to consider its verdict late on a Friday afternoon thereby putting undue pressure on it to return an early decision. 2.7 The re-trial began in the Home Circuit Court, Kingston, on 24 October 1983. Mr. Collins was represented by H. C., Q. C. The author submits that Detective G. continued to manipulate the judicial process as well as the jurors. Justice G., who had heard previous applications on behalf of the author in the Portland Magistrates Court, was assigned to hear the re-trial ; the author immediately complained to counsel that the judge was biased against him, in the light of the statement referred to in paragraph 2.3 above. H. C. told him that nothing could be done about this. 2.11 The author appealed to the Court of Appeal of Jamaica, which dismissed the appeal on 11 February 1986. He notes that he has encountered many problems in obtaining a copy of the written judgment of the Court of Appeal. As to the possibility of a petition or special leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, he notes that as leading counsel in London has opined that there is no merit in such a petition, this remedy provides no prospective avenue of redress. 2.8 The author notes that on 26 October 1963, two witnesses who were present in court and ready to testify on his behalf, KS. E. H. and Ms. El. E., saw three members of the jury board a police car driven by Detective G. Bl. H. followed the car to 2 quiet lane, where she found G. and his assistant talking to the jury members, indicating that he depended on them and asking them not to let him down. A similar scene was witnessed by Bl. H. on the following day, upon which she informed counsel, in the author’s presence, of the attempted jury tampering witnessed by her. H. C. promised to notify the judge but failed to do so. He was reminded of the 2.12 As to the conditions of his detention, the author indicates that he has suffered ill-treatment on death row on several occasions, On 28 May 1990, the author was among a number of. prisoners searched by approximately 60 prison warders, who not only injured the author but also forced him to undress in the presence of other inmates, warders, soldiers and policemen, 53