R v Lesperance & Ors (CO 51/2013) [2017] SCSC 842 (16 March 2017)

R v Lesperance & Ors (CO 51/2013) [2017] SCSC 842 (16 March 2017)

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the charges of robbery with violence, aiding and abetting, conspiracy to rob, and stealing by servant against A1, A2, A3, A4, and A5, except that A3 was found guilty of conspiracy to steal (5th count) and A5 was found guilty of receiving stolen property. The evidence against the other accused was circumstantial, speculative, or based on inadmissible statements. The recovery of stolen money from A5, with his knowledge, proved the offence of receiving stolen property.

Citation
[2017] SCSC 842
Parties
Prosecution: The Republic; 1st Accused: Hansel Lesperance; 2nd Accused: Darrel Victor; 3rd Accused: Ruth Rosette; 4th Accused: Martin Celeste; 5th Accused: Channel Quatre
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
16 March 2017
Case Number
CO 51/2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
A1, A2, and A4 acquitted on all counts; A3 convicted on 5th count (conspiracy to steal), acquitted on other counts; A5 convicted of receiving stolen property, acquitted on other counts.
Legal Topics
Robbery With Violence, Aiding and Abetting, Conspiracy, Stealing by Servant, Receiving Stolen Property, Burden of Proof, Standard of Proof, Double Jeopardy
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Robbery With Violence Aiding and Abetting Conspiracy Stealing by Servant Receiving Stolen Property Burden of Proof Standard of Proof +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic

Prosecution

Hansel Lesperance

1st Accused

Darrel Victor

2nd Accused

Ruth Rosette

3rd Accused

Martin Celeste

4th Accused

Channel Quatre

5th Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused persons committed robbery with violence against Barclays Bank
  2. 2 Whether the accused aided and abetted the commission of robbery
  3. 3 Whether the accused conspired to commit robbery and/or stealing

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the charges of robbery with violence, aiding and abetting, conspiracy to rob, and stealing by servant against A1, A2, A3, A4, and A5, except that A3 was found guilty of conspiracy to steal (5th count) and A5 was found guilty of receiving stolen property. The evidence against the other accused was circumstantial, speculative, or based on inadmissible statements. The recovery of stolen money from A5, with his knowledge, proved the offence of receiving stolen property.

Court Disposition

A1, A2, and A4 acquitted on all counts; A3 convicted on 5th count (conspiracy to steal), acquitted on other counts; A5 convicted of receiving stolen property, acquitted on other counts.

Orders

  • A1, A2, and A4 are acquitted and discharged on all counts.
  • A3 is convicted on the 5th count (conspiracy to steal) and acquitted on all other counts.