The man convicted of ending the lives of six women when he firebombed the Campus Trendz store does not believe he was responsible for their deaths.
This was contained in the psychological report prepared on Jamar DeWayne Orlando Bynoe, which was read into evidence when his re-sentencing hearing continued in the No. 5A Supreme Court yesterday.
In addition, his psychiatric report revealed he was more remorseful about the punishment he might face for his actions rather than for the actions themselves.
Bynoe, formerly of Headley’s Land, Bank Hall, St Michael, was found guilty, in July 2016, of the murder of six women – Shanna Griffith, Kelly-Ann Welch, Pearl Cornelius, Kellishaw Olivierre, Nikita Belgrave and Tiffany Harding – in the Campus Trendz blaze on September 3, 2010.
He was ordered hanged for his actions. He appealed his sentence and conviction but the Court of Appeal told him it had found no merit in the grounds and upheld the conviction.
However, it stated that since the mandatory sentence of death had been removed, that sentence would be vacated and the court would be remitting Bynoe’s matter back to the High Court judge, Justice Michelle Weekes, who presided over the trial, for him to be re-sentenced.
He was represented by attorney Sian Lange, while Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Alliston Seale, SC, appeared for the State.
Yesterday, psychologist at Dodds Prison, Sean Pilgrim, said that over the course of the assessment, while Bynoe “expressed regrets about the events that led to his conviction, [he] did not accept responsibility for his current charge”.
“He explained that his actions did not directly contribute to the deaths of the victims and, as a result, he was not guilty for what happened,” Pilgrim read from his report.
“When asked what he thought would be a fair and reasonable outcome of his court matter, he conveyed the hope that he would be released so that he could resume his life and make up for the time lost while he was in prison.”
The psychologist further read: “Of primary concern was his attitude towards his offence. Mr Bynoe’s expressed beliefs of innocence challenges the possibility of reform in the face of such biased motivated reasoning.
