On July 24, 2026, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), the highest appellate court for the Caribbean region, delivered a landmark ruling dismissing a final appeal from a Barbadian man convicted of murder, cementing the guilty verdict and 28-year prison sentence originally handed down more than seven years prior.
The case centers on Baggio Kristidi Daniel, who was found guilty by a Barbadian trial court in 2019 for the fatal shooting of Alex Romel Samuel. The killing took place on a public minibus operating in Barbados, shocking local communities and prompting a swift criminal investigation that led to Daniel’s arrest. Prosecutors secured the conviction through two key pillars of evidence: consistent testimony from multiple eyewitnesses to the incident, and an oral confession Daniel gave to law enforcement officers while he was in custody following his arrest.
After the initial guilty verdict, Daniel first appealed the outcome to the Barbados Court of Appeal, which declined to overturn the conviction and sentence. Undeterred, Daniel exercised his right to appeal to the regional supreme court, the CCJ, advancing a series of legal arguments claiming his original trial had been unfair and violated his constitutional rights.
Daniel’s legal team put forward four core claims to challenge the conviction. First, they argued that Daniel’s constitutional right to consult with a legal attorney before speaking to police had been unlawfully breached during the investigation phase. Second, they contended the trial judge had failed to properly examine and rule on this alleged rights violation. Third, they claimed the trial judge incorrectly allowed the jury to make the final decision on whether Daniel’s confession to police could be admitted as evidence in the case. Finally, they argued the trial judge had neglected to give the jury adequate guidance on evaluating the reliability of certain pieces of evidence presented during proceedings.
In a unanimous ruling led by Justice Bulkan, and endorsed by CCJ President Justice Anderson alongside fellow justices Rajnauth-Lee, Jamadar and Ononaiwu, the court rejected every one of Daniel’s legal challenges. The judgment detailed that while the trial judge did not issue an explicit formal ruling on the alleged violation of the right to legal counsel, court records from the original trial clearly showed she had effectively ruled that no breach of Daniel’s rights had occurred. By accepting the testimony and evidence provided by responding police officers, the original trial judge implicitly rejected Daniel’s claim that authorities had prevented him from contacting and meeting with a lawyer before interrogation.
The CCJ also pushed back on the claim that the admissibility of the confession was wrongfully left to the jury. The regional court clarified that the original trial judge had already made a preliminary ruling that the confession was admissible, and the judge’s instructions to the jury were only meant to guide them in assessing whether the confession itself was reliable, not whether it could be considered as evidence at all. In its ruling, the CCJ reiterated a core legal principle: juries are required to throw out any confession obtained through oppressive tactics or in violation of a defendant’s fundamental rights, even if the jury believes the confession is factually true.
Additionally, the court found that under existing CCJ legal precedent, the original trial was not required to issue a special warning about the reliability of disputed evidence. The ruling noted that the trial judge had already given the jury appropriate general caution about evaluating potential weaknesses in any piece of evidence, satisfying judicial requirements.
The CCJ emphasized throughout the ruling that the right to access legal counsel during criminal proceedings remains a fundamental, non-negotiable protection for all defendants. Even so, the court concluded that no such violation had occurred in Daniel’s case. The justices also highlighted the overall strength of the prosecution’s evidence presented at the original trial. While no single eyewitness directly observed the moment of the shooting, the combined, corroborating testimony of multiple eyewitnesses paired with additional supporting evidence provided more than sufficient grounds for the jury’s guilty verdict, the court found.
With no material legal errors identified that would have compromised the fairness of Daniel’s original trial, the CCJ officially dismissed the appeal, leaving the 2019 murder conviction and 28-year prison sentence fully intact. Marlon Markland Gordon represented Daniel, the appellant, while Krystal C. Delaney and Neville Watson argued the case for the State of Barbados, the respondent. The full text of the official judgment is now available to the public on the CCJ’s official website, at www.ccj.org.