Sherif Kareem, who murdered his fellow co-conspirator Lily Everhart and kidnapped the Chief Justice, has been sentenced to death after being found guilty of second degree murder, committing an act of terrorism, and other felony charges.
According to court findings, this incident started on June 1 at the Occupation St Courthouse under the guise of a name change request. The Chief Justice was then held at gunpoint by co-conspirator Lily Everhart and brought to where Sherif Kareem was hiding so that he could handcuff the Chief Justice and take him to a undisclosed location.
During this hostage situation, Mr Kareem made a number of demands, including dropping all the court cases he was associated with, withdrawing contempt of court charges, and stepping down as the Chief Justice. According to the findings of the case, Sherif Kareem threatened to kill the Chief Justice if he didn’t meet those demands.
The court also found that Mr Kareem attacked and murdered Ms Everhart after they had moved the Chief Justice to another location; she had given the Chief Justice a phone, and had contacted law enforcement.
In an opinion from presiding justice Doc Hilliard he labelled Sherif Kareem:
a manipulator, a liar, and every other pejorative one can surmise to describe a cold-blooded killer.
Doc Hilliard
Sherif Kareem was found guilty on all counts and was sentenced to death by Associate Justice Doc Hilliard.
The execution, by state sanction firing squad, will occur on July 5th.
Shout News has asked lawyers representing Mr Kareem if there is going to be an appeal against the case or the sentence but we have not received a response.
Sherif Kareem was found guilty of:
- Committing a Terroristic Act x1
- Aggravated Second Degree Murder x1
- Aggravated Assault x1
- Aggravated Hostage Taking x1
- Aggravated Robbery x1
There has been some controversy surrounding the written opinion of the court published by Doc Hilliard. Some have suggested that the language used isn’t impartial with one legal analyst telling Shout News that it could complicate the case if it was brought forward on appeal, arguing that the justice could have been biased in their decision given the close working arrangements of the Judiciary.
Even after the Defendant threatened to kill the Chief Justice for defying his demands, Chief Justice Clarkson persisted in his refusal. Is this bravery in action? Heroism? A lack of regard for his own life? Is the Chief Justice a savior of our judicial system despite the Defendant’s pontification to the contrary? Probably.
Doc Hilliard
Another analyst has argued to Shout News that It is difficult to appear unbiased in any case involving a judicial colleague, especially one involving violent acts against a colleague.
Leave a Reply