Shakilla Hanley found not guilty in VI double murder
Hanley, along with Shakeel Ryan, was charged with attempted murder and murder, having been accused of playing a part in the May 8, 2017, murder of Shaun Richards and the June 21, 2017, murder of David Springette respectively.
Another person, Essadro Jefferson, was charged with conspiracy to murder Springette, having been on remand at His Majesty's Prison (HMP) for attempting to murder the same man, David Springette.
Richards aka ‘Tubby’ was shot outside his residence in Long Look on the evening of May 6, 2017. Richards succumbed to his injuries on May 8, 2017.
Meanwhile, Springette aka Mooney was also shot outside the Wayside Bar in Fat Hogs Bay on the evening of June 21, 2017. He was pronounced dead at the scene after Springette had survived two earlier attempts made on his life.
Sources indicated that Shakilla Hanley had reportedly been at HM Prison since July of 2017, however, the trial started just about 8 weeks ago in September of 2023 when she pleaded not guilty to the two counts of murder.
Following the 8-week trial, her lead Attorney-at-Law, Guyana national Stephen R. Daniels, entered a no-case submission.
Madam Justice Angelica Teelucksingh today, November 7, 2013, upheld the no-case submission with the 9-member jury, returning a not guilty verdict against Hanley.
Our News Centre will bring more details as they become available.
.png)
.png)
.png)
Follow Us On
37 Responses to “Shakilla Hanley found not guilty in VI double murder”
It is no good blaming the police. The DPP reviewed the evidence and advised that it was sufficient to convict. Yet again she was wrong. How
Many more times do we have to watch this happen before she is replaced.
My God this is so shameful and disappointing.
How many No Case submission that has been successful and how many not Guilty Plea that has been returned since this DPP took office.
But again she BORN HERE so that is ok.
As the DPP reminds us whenever she gets the opportunity, the decision is solely hers and she is not accountable to anybody for it.
If the evidence the police present to the DPP is not sufficient to prosecute, then the DPP should not prosecute. In those circumstances, she should either tell the police to look for more evidence or she should not prosecute.
Unfortunately what is happening is that the DPP, in reliance on her legal knowledge and judgment, is making a decision to prosecute. At the close of the prosecution case, Judge after Judge then tells her that the evidence is not sufficient (in effecting criticising her legal knowledge and judgment) and dismisses the case before it goes to the jury.
Fault rests with the DPP and not with the Police. The police could certainly do better, but it is the DPP that needs to be urgently replaced.
So let she stay where from not in a next man country.
Give Val Graham the Job. He is a people person, more approachable, unlike the one we have now.