Photo: (L-R) Mario Aguirre and Marcelino Chan

by Roy Davis (freelance writer)

BELIZE CITY, Fri. Oct. 13, 2023

The Belize Court of Appeal has dismissed the appeal of Mario Aguirre, 32, an auto mechanic of San Roman Village, Orange Walk, who was convicted of the murder of his cousin, Marcelino Chan, 54, and was sentenced to life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after he has served 20 years and 10 months. Aguirre had appealed his conviction and sentence. However, they were affirmed by the Belize Court of Appeal.

Aguirre was found guilty of murder on June 18, 2020, by Justice Herbert Lord in the Northern District session of what was then the Supreme Court. It was a trial presided over by the judge alone, without a jury.

Chan, a farmer of San Roman and the father of 11 children, was stabbed to death on February 25, 2017, in San Roman. Aguirre inflicted 7 stab wounds to him: in the left side of his chest, behind his ears and twice in his rib cage, which pierced his heart and back. Dr. Mario Estradabran, who performed a post-mortem on Chan’s body, testified that it was the wound to Chan’s heart that caused his death.

At the trial, which began on January 29, 2020, the Crown called 15 witnesses to prove that it was Aguirre who inflicted the harm on Chan that caused his death; and when he did so, it was without lawful justification and his specific intention was to kill.

The incident occurred at a party. Aguirre and his wife were involved in a dispute and Aguirre began to beat his wife, and Chan intervened. It was later, after Aguirre went home and returned, that Chan received the stab wounds.

Aguirre fled the scene, and he was on the run for a short period before he was apprehended by the police.

Aguirre gave a statement from the dock in which he claimed that it was a case of provocation and that he acted in self-defense. He called one witness, a woman, but her testimony did not fully corroborate his statement.

Aguirre had appealed on 5 grounds. The first ground was that the learned trial judge failed to consider the discrepancies/inconsistencies in the Crown’s case and by doing so, deprived the appellant of a fair trial. The second ground was that the learned trial judge failed to give the appellant a good character direction. The third ground was that the learned trial judge failed to apply the principles of self-defense. The fourth ground was that the learned trial judge failed to consider the defense of intoxication; and the fifth and final ground was that the judge failed to give himself a Lucas direction.

Aguirre was represented by attorney Leeroy Banner, and the Respondent was represented by Senior Crown Counsel Sheneiza Smith.