MANCHESTER, Jamaica — A man who spent more than a year on remand was freed on Friday after the parish court in Mandeville upheld a no case submission and entered a verdict of not guilty on charges of shop breaking and larceny.

The ruling followed a two-day trial arising out of allegations that the accused was involved in the breaking and entry of a business establishment in Manchester and the theft of cash and other items. The accused had been charged with shop breaking and larceny, offences which carry serious custodial consequences upon conviction.

The prosecution’s case relied primarily on circumstantial evidence and disputed identification, including assertions that the accused had previously been seen in the vicinity of the establishment and was allegedly identifiable from video footage obtained after the incident.

During the trial, significant issues arose regarding the clarity, reliability and consistency of the identification evidence, as well as contradictions within the prosecution’s witness testimony.

At the conclusion of the Crown’s case, defence counsel Rodain Richardson and Justyn Reid, attorneys-at-law, submitted that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case sufficient to warrant the accused being called upon to answer the charges. The defence argued that the evidence fell well below the legal threshold required, particularly in light of the strict caution applicable to visual identification evidence.

In delivering her ruling, Justice D Lawrence-Pivotte applied the established principles in R v Galbraith and R v Turnbull, concluding that the prosecution’s case, even when taken at its highest, was incapable of sustaining a conviction. The court therefore upheld the submission of no case to answer and entered a formal verdict of not guilty, bringing the proceedings to an end.

The accused man had been remanded in custody for approximately one year and three months while awaiting trial. Although a bail offer had been made earlier in the proceedings, his family was financially unable to take up the offer, resulting in his continued incarceration throughout the pendency of the case.

“This decision underscores the fundamental principle that no individual should be deprived of their liberty on the basis of speculation or weak identification evidence. A submission of no case to answer exists to prevent precisely that injustice. The court’s ruling today affirms the importance of careful investigation and strict adherence to evidential standards,” Richardson said.

The accused, visibly emotional following the verdict, expressed gratitude to his legal team, stating: “Thank you for believing in me. Mi innocent from day one. A the wrong man dem pick up.”