‘I did not see him attacking any of the officers’

A key prosecution witness in the trial of six policemen charged in the 2013 Acadia Drive triple killing testified yesterday that she saw police personnel firing at a man who ran from a vehicle and jumped over a wall during the incident.

The woman, who said she was watching from her third-floor apartment on Acadia Drive, told the Home Circuit Court that after hearing what sounded like gunshots, she went to her window and observed a police vehicle parked in front of a blue Mitsubishi with four policemen present. She said her partner was by her side as the incident unfolded.

An order was previously made by Sonia Bertram Linton for the witness to remain anonymous following concerns raised by the prosecution over her safety.

The officers on trial are Sergeant Simroy Mott, Corporal Donovan Fullerton, and constables Andrew Smith, Sheldon Richards, Orandy Rose and Richard Lynch. They are charged in connection with the January 12, 2013 fatal shooting of Matthew Lee, Mark Allen and Ucliffe Dyer.

The witness testified that after hearing what sounded like a gunshot, she went to her window and saw a man dressed in a white T-shirt at the back of the Mitsubishi, initially sitting on the ground. Another man stood at the front of the vehicle holding what appeared to be papers, while a third man remained inside the car.

After hearing “another set of gunshots”, she said she saw the man in the white T-shirt lying on the ground with what appeared to be blood.

She further told the court that the third man exited the vehicle with his hands raised, appeared to be speaking, and then ran towards a wall.

“I did not see him attacking any of the police officers,” she said, adding that she did not see anything in his hands.

THE CHASE

According to her testimony, officers began firing as the man ran and jumped over a wall into a yard. She said she did not see him firing at the police at any time.

The witness stated that the man fell under a tree in the yard and that a policeman went in after him. She later heard additional gunshots coming from that direction.

She also testified that another police vehicle arrived at the scene. A man wearing what appeared to be a police vest exited and fired towards the back of the Mitsubishi, where the man in the white T-shirt was lying. She said she also noticed a policeman walk to where the man had run and fallen and fire a shot.

The witness said she later saw the man who had been holding papers earlier, whom she described as of Indian descent, on the ground.

According to the witness, she never observed any of the men shooting at the police or attacking them. She also did not see them with any weapons.

BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

Meanwhile, during cross-examination, defence attorney Hugh Wildman questioned the witness extensively about a meeting she had with lead prosecutor Kathy-Ann Pyke and an Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM) representative in a room adjacent to the courthouse last Wednesday.

He suggested that the three were “behind closed doors” discussing her testimony and implied that the meeting was improper.

The witness acknowledged that she met with the prosecutor in a room and that they reviewed her statement.

“We were discussing my statement,” she said.

Pressed further, she agreed that they discussed questions she might be asked in court, but rejected the suggestion that she had been coached on how to answer.

Wildman also suggested that she was part of a conspiracy to “concoct a story” and to “condemn innocent police officers”, comparing the situation to the biblical trial of Jesus.

However, the witness firmly denied the allegation.

She admitted that she was invited to the room by the prosecutor and was there with both Pyke and an INDECOM representative before Wildman entered and accused Pyke of acting improperly.

According to the witness, during the uproar caused by Wildman, she wondered, “Who is this crazy person?” and said she had never seen anything like it before.

She acknowledged hearing Wildman tell Pyke that her conduct was improper and that he intended to report her to the court.

The court heard that the witness never requested a meeting and was not aware that the INDECOM representative present was also a witness in the matter. She explained that when she arrived at court, the prosecutor greeted her and suggested they sit in a counsel’s room rather than remain on the benches.

The witness also told the court that she and her partner had composed a letter documenting what they had seen after the incident.

The trial continues on Wednesday.

tanesha.mundle@gleanerjm.com