King’s Counsel (KC) Valerie Neita-Robertson, who is representing Jamaica Defence Force (JDF) soldier Lance Corporal Greg Tingling in the Keith Clarke murder trial, expressed anger over the line of questioning of a witness by the prosecution on Monday.

Neita-Robertson felt prosecutor Jeremy Taylor, KC, was wasting time by appearing to ask Brigadier Mahatma Williams, a very high ranking member of the JDF, the same questions over and over again during cross-examination.

Her client, Tingling, is one of three soldiers on trial in the Home Circuit Court in Kingston in relation to the May 27, 2010 shooting death of accountant Keith Clarke. The other two soldiers are Lance Corporal Odel Buckley and Private Arnold Henry.

Clarke was killed inside the master bedroom of his house at 18 Kirkland Height in Red Hills, St Andrew during a police military operation which was geared towards capturing then fugitive-drug lord, Christopher “Dudus” Coke. Coke was wanted in the United States on drugs and weapons charges, and was believed to have been hiding out in the basement at Clarke’s house.

Neita-Robertson raised an objection while Taylor questioned Williams about statements he gave to Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM) regarding the events leading up to, during and after Clarke’s death.

Taylor, who applied for the witness to be treated as hostile, repeatedly quizzed Brigadier Williams on whether he told the whole truth when he gave his statements about military debriefing activities which took place after Clarke’s demise.

After listening to Taylor’s line of questioning, Neita-Robertson addressed trial judge Dale Palmer, saying, “My lord, I am objecting.

“This gentleman, Queen’s Counsel,” Neita-Robertson said before Taylor sought to stop her in her tracks to remind her that his correct title was King’s Counsel.

A sharp-minded Neita-Robertson responded to Taylor, saying, “It is the same thing, but the Queen fits you better”.

Directing her attention back to Judge Palmer, Neita-Robertson said, “My lord, he has applied to treat my witness as hostile. There is only one thing so far that he has challenged the witness on, which was the fact that he interacted with the accused persons and others contradicted his evidence that he said he did not. I think we are wasting time because he is now cross-examining on things that are of no relevance.

“He has breached all the borders of treating a witness as hostile and all these questions about debriefing are absolutely irrelevant to this matter. This is the prosecution’s witness. All of this evidence has gone on over a two day period and I don’t have a statement and nothing to refer to, to say this is the evidence he is going to give and this is what to expect,” Neita-Robertson continued.

“This evidence is thrust upon us like a thief in the night. We don’t know where he is going. The statement I have, which I had from the inquiry stage in which you were involved, had nothing to do with the evidence over the last two court sessions, nothing. Zero my lord, zero… This is the sort of thing that upsets me my lord. I am not used to this,” she added.

KC Peter Champagnie, who is the attorney for Lance Corporal Buckley, also raised an objection over similar issues highlighted by Neita-Robertson regarding Taylor’s line of questioning.

“My lord, I rise to object on the basis of relevance and in any event it seems to be my recollection that this was traversed before now,” Champagnie said.

Another objection was raised by Linton Gordon, the attorney representing Private Henry.

Addressing the judge, Gordon said, “Mi lord, in addition to that, my learned friend and King’s Counsel is going over questions already asked about what happened at a general debriefing. We spent some time dealing with that question extensively and we are back at it now. For whatever reason, I don’t know”

Judge Palmer sought to help to clear up the confusion over why Taylor seemed to be asking the same questions repeatedly.

The witness told the court that after the killing of Clarke, a debriefing session was held with a number of soldiers who were believed to have entered Clarke’s bedroom in the early morning on May 27, 2010 when he was shot more than 20 times by soldiers, including in his back. He explained that further debriefing took place in order to narrow things down to who entered the accountant’s bedroom.

“Earlier evidence was that a debriefing was held. The evidence now is that there was another debriefing held on special specifics. It arises because he introduced the realm of two different debriefings or one sub-debriefing,” Judge Palmer said.