Bertil Fox

In May 1998, Bertil, a dual national of the United Kingdom and St Kitts and Nevis, was convicted of the murders of Leyoca Browne, his former fiancé, and Violet Browne, her mother.

At the time, the death penalty was the mandatory punishment for murder in St Kitts and Nevis. This meant that once Bertil had been convicted, he was automatically sentenced to death.

The mandatory death penalty is recognised in international law as a violation of the right to life as it is arbitrary, inhumane and violates due process guarantees. This is because it prevents a Court from considering the facts of the offense or the characteristics of each individual offender during sentencing, often leading to disproportionate and unjust outcomes.

They brought me in guilty. Once they’d done that, the judge himself, regardless of how he feels, can do nothing because at that time the death sentence was automatic… He’s got to sentence you to death.

Challenging the mandatory death penalty

The Death Penalty Project became involved in Bertil’s case in 1999, providing free legal representation as he pursued appeals before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

His appeals against conviction were unsuccessful. However, in March 2002, the Privy Council granted an appeal against his sentence and, in a landmark judgment, ruled that the mandatory death penalty imposed on him was unconstitutional.

This meant that his death sentence was quashed and his case returned to the High Court of St Kitts and Nevis, so that he could be resentenced. It also meant that the mandatory death penalty was outlawed in St Kitts and Nevis, opening the door for other individuals on death row to challenge their sentences on the same grounds.

Crucially, unlike when Bertil had first been sentenced to death, the High Court was now able to consider mitigating evidence before deciding the appropriate punishment – a hallmark of any fair and effective criminal justice system.

As part of the proceedings, The Death Penalty Project instructed UK forensic psychiatrist Dr Diana Tamlyn to assess Bertil. Before his conviction, Bertil had been a professional bodybuilder and two-time Mr Universe winner. He had used anabolic steroids since the age of 14. Dr Tamyln’s evidence considered his prolonged use of anabolic steroids and its impact on his mental state and responsibility at the time of the offences.

In the excessive doses taken by body builders to enhance and maintain their appearance, and particularly if taken over a prolonged period – in Bertil’s case, over 40 years – abuse of anabolic steroids can lead to well recognised psychological effects, including loss of inhibition and a lack of judgment, as well as violent, hostile, anti-social behaviour often known as ‘roid rage’.

Dr Tamyln concluded that, at the time of the offence, “Bertil Fox was suffering from an abnormality of mind, due to prolonged steroid abuse, which caused a loss of control and thus substantially impaired his responsibility for the offences.”

The judge placed significant weight on this medical evidence when deciding not to impose the death penalty. In September 2002, Bertil’s death sentence was substituted for two life sentences.

Two decades in prison, and the Prerogative of Mercy

Bertil’s remaining journey through the criminal justice process was lengthy.

Working alongside local attorney Angelina Gracy Sokoo-Bobb, we continued to offer him free legal assistance.

The Prerogative of Mercy is a power vested in the Governor-General of St Kitts and Nevis. It enables the government to pardon an individual, reduce their sentence or remit whole or part of their punishment.

Under the Prison Rules in St Kitts and Nevis, The Mercy Board must consider a person for release if they have served ten years of their sentence prior to reaching the age of 60, or if they have served fifteen years of their sentence. Additional considerations include the mental and physical condition of a person, as well as the effect of imprisonment on their health, demeanour and attitude towards crime in general.

By August 2020, Bertil was 69 years old and had spent 22 years in prison, but his eligibility for release had not been reviewed. This was a breach of his statutory rights and legitimate expectations under the Prison Rules. In 2021, Bertil filed Judicial Review proceedings to challenge his continued imprisonment and the failure of the authorities to review his sentences. The Court agreed that Bertil’s case should be reviewed by the Mercy Board.

In August 2022, after 25 years in prison, the Mercy Board granted Bertil’s immediate release. Soon afterwards, he returned to the UK in order to live closer to his children.