THE ex-convict who is a witness in the murder trial of Constable Collis ‘Chucky’ Brown was yesterday caught off-guard by a clause in his plea bargain deal, which says that he will be recalled for sentencing if he failed to give evidence against the defendant.

The constable, who has been in custody since 2014, is being tried for the murder of Robert “Gutty” Dawkins on January 10, 2009, as well as the double killing of Andrew Fearon and Wayne Douglas on December 13, 2012 — both in May Pen, Clarendon.

The witness, who alleged that he was a police informant, previously testified that he was the person who had provided information about Douglas’ whereabouts to Constable Brown on the day that Douglas was allegedly shot and killed.

However, based on a witness statement that he had given to the Independent Commission of Investigations concerning his dealings with Brown and his failure to report what he had known to the authority, he was charged with misprision of felony on October 16, but was offered a plea bargain deal six days later in which he was given a one-year sentence suspended for two years after he pleaded guilty.

But yesterday, while undergoing cross-examination in the Home Circuit Court by Brown’s lead attorney Norman Godfrey, he appeared surprised by the clause about him being recalled for sentencing, which he initially denied was a part of the deal.

“Is it a part of the deal that if you don’t give the required evidence you could be recalled for sentencing?” the lawyer asked.

“No sir, don’t know what you talking about,” the witness replied while smirking.

However, after he was shown a copy of the plea bargain he said he was not made aware of that condition.

“I did not read that; that was not said to me,” said the witness who seemed taken aback.

“That’s just the justice system’s work,” he then remarked.

He was also asked by the lawyer if he was promised a non-custodial sentence but he denied receiving any promise.

“I pleaded guilty, it’s not a promise it’s a plea deal, the witness said. “Promise, Sir; I wasn’t promised.”

The witness was also asked if his lawyer had explained the meaning of the charge to him to which he answered in the affirmative.

“Misprision is understood by me to mean that you know that a felony is committed and you did not report it to the authority and you keep it to yourself,” he also explained.

“Since you now understand what makes up misprision of felony would you agree that you never tell anyone in authority,” Godfrey asked.

“No sir, I did very much, positive,” he said.

The witness maintained that he had spoken to Constable Brown about the kidnapping of the young girl by Douglas as well as the double murder of Douglas and Fearon.

He also testified, under cross-examination, that he had told Brown about a robbery attempt by Douglas on one of Brown’s ‘don’.

However, he told the court that he did not speak to the superintendent at May Pen Police Station about the murder of Douglas and Fearon, as Constable Brown was also someone in authority.

At the same time, he admitted that he spoke to a superintendent four to five days after the murder incident and that it was in relation to money that was to be paid to him.

The payment in question was $40,000 which he previously testified was given to him by a new superintendent who was introduced to him by Brown. The court was not told what the money was for.

The trial will continue today with the witness undergoing further cross-examination.