Appeal Court Overturns Explosives Conviction
The BVI Court of Appeal has quashed a 2015 conviction for unlawful possession of explosives after ruling that ammunition is not covered by the Explosives Ordinance. The appellant retains a separate conviction for carrying a firearm without a licence, which the court upheld.
The BVI Court of Appeal has set aside a conviction for unlawful possession of explosives, ruling that ammunition does not fall within the statutory definition of an "explosive" under the territory's Explosives Ordinance. The judgment resolves an appeal brought by Antonio Stoutt in relation to a police interception in Road Town on April 14, 2013.
Police searching a vehicle driven by Stoutt found a 9mm Luger pistol with four rounds of ammunition under the front passenger seat. Stoutt was convicted in the Magistrate's Court in 2015 of carrying a firearm without a licence and unlawful possession of explosives. He appealed both convictions, and the appeal has remained pending since it was filed in July 2015.
On the explosives count the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, relying in part on the earlier appellate decision in Selvin Chinnery v The Commissioner of Police, which clarified that ammunition is not captured by the statutory definition of explosives. The court said that precedent can be applied retrospectively to unresolved appeals and concluded that, in any event, a proper statutory interpretation of the Explosives Ordinance would not reasonably encompass ammunition.
As a result, the court said the appellant could not have been properly charged or convicted of possession of explosives and set that conviction aside. The decision hinges on the wording of section 2 of the Explosives Ordinance and the distinction between ammunition and explosive substances as intended by the legislation.
However, the Court of Appeal dismissed Stoutt's challenge to his conviction for carrying a firearm without a licence. The judges found that the magistrate correctly considered both common law possession and the statutory deeming provision, which presumes possession when a firearm is found in a vehicle owned or controlled by the accused unless that presumption is rebutted.
The court also rejected arguments that the absence of DNA or other forensic evidence automatically exonerated the appellant, noting that forensic results are one of several factors to be weighed and are not determinative of guilt. For BVI residents, the ruling clarifies the limits of the Explosives Ordinance and may prompt review of any past convictions that charged ammunition as an explosive.
It also underscores the continued strength of statutory possession rules where weapons are discovered in a vehicle tied to an accused person.
Primary source: BVI News