A lawyer convicted of murdering the mother of his child was yesterday sentenced to serve at least 27 years behind bars.

Kamal Worrell, who has already filed an appeal against his conviction for the 2020 murder of Chavelle Dillon Burgess, was also sentenced to six months in prison for seven counts of assault. All the sentences are to run concurrently.

Puisne Judge Juan Wolffe said: “No words in any esteemed dictionary can express or convey the heinous nature of the act carried out by the defendant.

“What he did in April 2020 was beyond words. It was of such an egregious nature that it is a rare occasion in the history of the hundreds of thousands of cases that come before this court.

“Yet the defendant expressed no regrets or remorse about what he did. I suspect, in fact, that he probably will never express any regret or remorse.”

Mr Justice Wolffe added that Worrell’s refusal to provide his son with the closure of knowing what happened to his mother went against every ethical fibre of a just society.

“It is for this reason that the court must send a very, very, very strong message to the defendant that his behaviour cannot and will not be tolerated,” he added.

In January, Worrell was found guilty by a majority decision of murdering Ms Dillon-Burgess on an unknown date between April 10 and June 11, 2020.

The Supreme Court jury also found Worrell guilty of seven charges of common assault, six by unanimous decision and one by majority.

Worrell was cleared of one count of unlawful wounding by a unanimous verdict.

During the trial, which stretched from last November to early January, the 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, but she later withdrew the allegations against him.

On April 30, 2020, Ms Dillon-Burgess was reported missing by her family, and despite an island-wide search, she has not been found.

Throughout the trial, Worrell maintained his innocence, claiming that he had never acted violently towards Ms Dillon-Burgess and had only ever acted to defend himself when she lashed out against him.

He told the court that Ms Dillon-Burgess had walked out of the home that they shared with their child after an argument on April 11, 2020, and she returned briefly days later only to collect personal items.

Prosecutors argued that Ms Dillon-Burgess had given 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.

Cindy Clarke, the Director of Public Prosecutions, suggested that Worrell felt as though Ms Dillon-Burgess was ruining his career with her allegations of violence, and urged the jury to consider his actions before and after her disappearance.

Ms Clarke also noted that the disappearance took place in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, when movement was highly restricted.

At a sentencing hearing, Ms Clarke said that a life sentence was required of such a conviction, and called for a minimum term of between 25 and 28 years behind bars.

She said that the history of domestic violence in the case was a seriously aggravating factor, along with the disposal of Ms Dillon-Burgess’s body.

Ms Clarke added that the crime was further aggravated by the victim being the mother of Worrell’s child, a lack of remorse, attempts by the defendant to conceal evidence and the fact that their child was in the house when the murder took place.

“The only mitigating factor is the lack of previous convictions,” she said.

The court also heard victim impact statements from Ms Dillon-Burgess’s grandmother, Thelma-Jean Wong, who shared her heartbreak about her death.

“She loved her family,” she said. “Her son meant the world to her.”

The victim’s mother, Rose Belboda, said the trauma of her daughter still being missing was “unbearable”.

“I believed that she would outlive me, but this belief existed when I was more naive about evil,” she added.

Worrell told the court that he had not been provided adequate facilities to prepare for his sentencing and that he had not been able to obtain legal counsel for the hearing.

Ms Clarke noted that Worrell had been provided with papers in February and had not raised any concerns about facilities or representation when he appeared before the court on March 1.

“This defendant, the only thing he said is he wanted it dealt with as soon as possible,” she said.

Mr Justice Wolffe chose not to adjourn the matter and urged the defendant to provide information about what had happened to Ms Dillon-Burgess to provide closure to her family and his son.

He added that Worrell had said he had tried to be a “phenomenal” father to his son, saying that he could help his son address the trauma of the loss of his mother.

“It might be that he is at an age where he is asking himself questions,” Mr Justice Wolffe said. “I am giving you an opportunity to let your son know where his mother is so that he could give his last farewells.”

Worrell responded that he had given evidence under oath during the trial.

“I am a father who tried his best to be a good father,” he said. “I always have. I always will.

“I gave my testimony under oath. I have nothing to add to that.”

• 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