Trial of the Century: Justice for Chavelle
A Supreme Court jury has found a lawyer guilty of murdering the mother of his child.
It was a majority decision after the jury deliberated into the night.
Kamal Worrell has denied allegations of killing Chavelle Dillon-Burgess on an unknown date between April 10 and June 11, 2020.
As the guilty verdict was read, Worrell lowered his head in the dock. The courtroom, which included family members of his victim, remained silent.
The Supreme Court jury also found Worrell guilty of seven charges of common assault, six by unanimous decision and one by majority.
Worrell was found not guilty in a unanimous decision on count two of unlawful wounding.
He requested bail and was denied, and was remanded until arraignments on February 1.
The case began in 2020 as a missing-person report, and the subsequent police investigation led to a murder inquiry.
Since the trial began in November, the Supreme Court heard that Ms Dillon-Burgess had accused Worrell of assault in relation to incidents in 2018 and 2019.
In both cases, she had said that arguments about their son had turned physical.
She subsequently withdrew her allegations in both cases.
On April 30, 2020, Ms Dillon-Burgess was reported missing by her family, and despite an island-wide search, she has not been found.
Police commissioner Darrin Simons commended the prosecution of a “difficult domestic murder case, which made history due to the absence of the victim’s body”.
Mr Simons said he believed it would deliver “some measure of closure for the victim's family, despite the unsettling fact that her body has not been found”.
He thanked detectives as well as the Director of Public Prosecutions in closing the book on the murder of Chavelle Dillon-Burgess
“Their tireless efforts and unwavering commitment to justice have resulted in this landmark conviction.”
Mr Simons said the investigation had “never wavered” despite her body never being found.
He added that former commissioner Stephen Corbishley’s commitment had been “instrumental” in an investigation that “should inspire hope for all victims, particularly those in abusive relationships”.
Mr Simons said police were “deeply invested” in securing justice, even in the most challenging circumstances.
“Furthermore, it sends a clear warning to those who engage in violence, particularly against vulnerable persons, that we will tenaciously pursue those responsible.”
Mr Simons offered “heartfelt condolences to Chavelle's family and friends, as well as her young son, who undoubtedly face a difficult road ahead”.
Detective Inspector Jason Smith gave remarks outside the court following the conviction of Kamal Worrell for the murder.
“Today’s result was justice for Chavelle, and I think we need not to forget that.”
Mr Smith added: “We welcome the results of the jury. They have spoken.
“This was a combined effort between the Bermuda Police Service, several units, as well as the Department of Public Prosecutions, and of course our larger part, which is you, the community.
“Many of you spent many hours and days of your personal time to search for Chavelle. We will remind you that Chavelle’s remains have not yet been found.
“And so, although the jury has spoken in this case, and a man has been held accountable for his actions, we are continuing to make our appeal for those of you in our community that have any information that can assist us to locate Chavelle’s remains.
“This is also a message for those women in our community who are suffering domestic violence, been victims of such, and might be afraid to come forward.
“This result today speaks to you and hopefully encourages you to come forward, so that the police can investigate and you can get help.
He called it “an historic case for Bermuda”.
Mr Smith thanked Cindy Clarke, the DPP, and her team.
He also commended police officers who had worked through “countless hours and sleepless nights” to see the case through.
Worrell, who was living with Ms Dillon-Burgess at the time, told police that she had left the home after an argument on April 11, 2020.
He told the court that Ms Dillon-Burgess returned to the house briefly on April 16 to collect items including a phone, but he had not seen her since that date.
During the trial, the court heard evidence from multiple witnesses who said that Ms Dillon-Burgess was not the type of person who would abandon her child.
Her friends and family also described the relationship between Worrell and Ms Dillon-Burgess as rocky with loud arguments and allegations of violence.
The jury heard a voice note sent by Ms Dillon-Burgess to a friend on the morning of April 11, in which she is heard to loudly curse at Worrell.
The court also heard a recording from Worrell’s phone recorded later that day in which Worrell could be heard cleaning while playing classical music with the sound of his son crying in the background.
Worrell told the court he had set the phone to record in case Ms Dillon-Burgess returned to the house and continued the argument, but he turned it off after she did not immediately return.
Throughout the trial, prosecutors argued that while Ms Dillon-Burgess had withdrawn assault charges against Worrell, she had done so either out of fear or as part of an effort to keep her family together.
Prosecutors also highlighted that Worrell failed to tell police that he had seen Ms Dillon-Burgess on April 16 and did not take part in any of the searches to locate her once she was reported missing.
Worrell, who represented himself, said he was hesitant to take part in searches or vigils because he understood that threats had been made against him on social media.
He added that, while he did not provide a police statement in the case, he had given police the information that he had.
Cindy Clarke, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said that while the case was built on circumstantial evidence, the jury could feel sure of Worrell’s guilt.
She suggested that Worrell thought Ms Dillon-Burgess was ruining his career by pressing criminal charges against him.
“She was ruining his life. He really couldn’t move on. He wasn’t living the life he felt a lawyer should be living,” she added. “He’s not bringing money into the house. She was the provider.”
Ms Clarke noted that when the offence allegedly took place, movement was extremely restricted because of Covid-19 regulations, and she urged jurors to consider Worrell’s actions before, during and after Ms Dillon-Burgess’s disappearance.
She said that Ms Dillon Burgess gave consistent stories of assault when talking to her friends, family and doctor and changed her story only when she was in court with the defendant in the room with her.
Ms Clarke said: “Do you think she was really lying? Or was she trying to stop the attacks the only way she knew how, to do what the defendant told her to do?”
Worrell responded that the prosecution’s case was built on speculation and argued that police failed to look into several potential leads into Ms Dillon-Burgess’s disappearance.
He said that while Ms Dillon-Burgess did make complaints of domestic violence against him, she had later recanted under oath and said that she had lied.
Worrell added that there was nothing in the phone records to support any claims of violence or coercion by him to try to convince her to withdraw the allegations.
“There is not a single text from her to me, or from me to her, which would even suggest that I had been violent,” he said.
Worrell told the court that he loved Ms Dillon-Burgess and maintained that, despite the allegations against him, he was not a violent man.
“It’s unfortunate for justice in this country they have brought this case without evidence,” he said. “It’s for the prosecutor to prove their case because from the start they didn’t have a case to prove. They didn’t even have a date when it happened.”
• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers
