THE two-week-old conspiracy to murder trial of renowned botanist Dr George Proctor and his driver Glenmore Fellington should come to an end this week.

Justice Gloria Smith yesterday started summation for jurors at the conclusion of addresses by the prosecution and defence lawyers in the Home Circuit Court.

The addresses came at the end of the defence’s case, in which both accused men denied knowledge of a plot to murder.

Smith told jurors to consider the evidence without sympathy for the feeble Proctor, 89, Fellington, or Mrs Proctor, who, along with three other persons, was supposed to be killed in April 2006, according to the prosecution.

Standing in the prisoner’s dock during the morning session of yesterday’s sitting both men — starting with Proctor — professed their innocence in very brief statements.

“I have no knowledge of the alleged plot and I am innocent,” Proctor said.

Fellington, 46, followed with an identical statement denying that he had plotted to kill Dr Proctor’s wife of over 30 years.

The prosecution is contending that during diverse dates between February 1, 2006 and April 20, 2006 both plotted to kill Proctor’s 69-year-old wife. The prosecution further contends that Dr Proctor had paid a man that Fellington had recommended to carry out the hit.

But instead, the potential hit-man — who has a long criminal record of convictions ranging from fraud to gun possession — reported the alleged plot to the police. He later became the prosecution’s star witness. The prosecution called a total of 17 witnesses to bolster its case.

Yesterday, in his address to the seven-member jury, Prosecutor Dirk Harrison said that the accused men’s erred in hiring the wrong man.

“Mr Fellington made one mistake: He hired the wrong man for the job,” Harrison said. “…[The witness] thief but him no kill people.”

As was the case during the testimony phase of the trial, attorneys Tom Tavares-Finson and Vincent Wellesley again attacked the credibility of the prosecution’s star witness, who has some 79 convictions dating back to the 1960s. Both men asked the jurors to return a verdict of not guilty.

Tavares-Finson questioned why the tape recording of conversations between the witness and both accused, was not played for the court. The recordings were made by the witness on the instruction of the police.

“If the tape don’t play, you must acquit without delay,” Tavares-Finson said.