THE prosecution in the murder trial of Constable Collis “Chucky” Brown yesterday told jurors that the case is not complicated; rather, it’s a simple case of “cock mouth kill cock”, as the defendant has provided all the details needed to convict him.

“The case starts with Collis Brown saying what he did, and then Mr … and Mr … and the other witnesses coming to support it.

“At the end of the day how the case has been put to you is ‘cock mouth kill cock’; the man mouth talk him way from start to finish,” Queen’s Counsel Caroline Hay — the lead prosecutor in the case — said during her closing arguments yesterday.

In fact, she said the defendant had been talking long before the interviews with Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM), as he had first met with a human rights group.

She said it was during the meeting with the human rights group the idea of him leaving Jamaica and going aboard originated, although he tried to make it appear as if he had been promised asylum by INDECOM

According to Hay, when Brown met with the human right group in a two-hour long meeting, he spoke about several things including that he was a member of a squad that was set up to kill bad men in Clarendon. She said he even disclosed that during one of the operations on which he was sent by his superior he was told to only leave the driver alive.

“The accused has told you everything. He has not said it once, he has not said it twice, and he has not said it thrice, he has said it in the recordings and in the statement that he signed,” she said in reference to two interviews that he had with INDECOM and the transcripts that he had signed.

Hay further reminded the jurors that Brown, who is charged for the murder of Robert “Gutty” Dawkins and the double murder of Andrew Fearon and Dwayne Douglas, in his recorded interviews had provided details about how he was part of a group that was formed to kill wanted men in Clarendon; the resources they were given; how they were dressed; how they carried out the killings, and how the scene would be handled following the shooting incidents.

She also told the jurors to bear in mind that the defendant has not denied that he had met with INDECOM or the human rights group or that he had provided all those details.

The prosecutor also highlighted that the defendant, in his interviews, had placed himself on the scene of the crime in both instances, even though he said in Gutty’s case he was merely the driver, while in the other case he was responsible for killing one the men in the double murder.

At the same time, Hay said while the defendant has been positing the defence that he was acting on the orders of his superiors, that is not a lawful defence for murder. She said what he did would be premeditated murder.

“So this order thing, in my view, is a way of making him look as if he was not fully responsible for his choices, and the orders make him look like he did not act alone,” Hay said.

Also, she said his notion that he was obligated to follow orders and could not question his superior contradicts his declaration in one of his interviews when he told INDECOM that ‘nobody cannot push him button’, in relation to the killing of Adif Washington at May Pen Hospital.

She said he clearly showed that he was a man who could stand up for himself, despite him saying in another breath that he had to follow instructions or else he would come under pressure.

The prosecutor also told the jurors that it must be noted that Brown was not forced to talk, and that he spoke freely and was at all times very relaxed.

Additionally, she said it important to note that the defendant, during one of his meetings, agreed that the killing of the men was in fact murder

“They had asked him why he thinks he was chosen and he [said] ‘I have the heart, yuh know. You have to have the heart to do things.’”

However, she said despite Brown’s knowledge that what he did was unlawful and wrong he did not want to take any responsibility for his actions. When the suggestion was made that he attends the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions with his revelation and to take part in a process, he only said, “a true” before changing the subject.

Nevertheless, Hay said Brown knew that one day he would have to take responsibility for his actions, recalling that during one of the meetings with INDECOM he had stated that he felt like he was signing himself into prison.

The prosecution continues its closing arguments today.