A neighbour of Constable Noel Maitland admitted on Monday that recordings from the closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera system outside his apartment were only saved for five days.

The neighbour told the court that he thought the recordings were secured, but it turned out that it was not so. He only found this out after representatives from the Independent Commission of Investigations (Indecom) accompanied him to his house to collect the camera system and any associated footage as evidence.

Constable Maitland is on trial for murder and preventing the lawful burial of a corpse following the disappearance of his 24-year-old girlfriend, Donna-Lee Donaldson, in July 2020.

Donaldson was last seen alive at the Chelsea Manor Apartment complex in New Kingston, St Andrew, where Maitland lived. Prosecutors theorise that she was murdered inside Maitland’s apartment between July 12 and 13, 2024 and her body disposed of in an unlawful manner.

It is alleged that CCTV footage showed Donaldson arriving at the apartment, but none showed her leaving.

The revelation from the neighbour, who is the fifth witness to give testimony in the trial at the Home Circuit Court, came out during cross-examination conducted by one of Maitland’s attorneys-at-law, Christopher Townsend.

The witness had told the court last week that he felt pressured by Maitland to delete CCTV footage. He testified that he told Maitland numerous times that he would not delete the footage.

On Monday, Townsend asked the neighbour, who was giving testimony via a secured video link as he is overseas, whether he at all complied with Maitland’s requests to delete the footage.

The witness said no.

However, when Townsend asked him if he knew where the footage was, the neighbour said, “No, I do not.”

When Townsend asked him if he knew how long the recordings remained on the system, the witness said that at the time he wasn’t precisely sure how long the footage was to remain.

Townsend probed whether the neighbour knew at the time that the footage was not stored on the system beyond five days.

The witness indicated that he was only made aware of that when he was taking the camera system to Indecom.

When Townsend asked him if there was any footage for the police to get on the July 21, 2022 the witness said, “Five days would have passed. I learned that the footage was there only for five days.”

The witness told the court that he had been of the impression that the footage would have been secure.

Townsend asked the witness if he had called the police after Maitland caused him to view the footage on July 14, 2022. He also asked him if he had called the police when he began to feel pressured by Maitland to erase CCTV footage.

The witness said “No”.

Townsend also asked him if he had called the police after he saw things being posted online about the case and after his mother had called him after she saw certain things on the news.

“No,” the witness said. He also said to the best of his knowledge he wouldn’t know if there was anything incriminating on the footage.

He admitted that he in fact told investigators that he did not see anything suspicious on the recording.

Prior to Townsend cross-examining the witness, senior prosecutor Claudette Thompson, during examination-in-chief, led the witness to explain what took place in his apartment on July 14, 2022 while he, Maitland, and a technician viewed footage from the camera.

The neighbour told the court that on July 14, 2022 between 7:00 pm and 8:00 pm, after viewing footage of July 11 and 12, 2022, the technician said he had to leave. Before leaving the apartment, the technician indicated that he could come back later in the night. The neighbour said that when the technician left, Maitland also left.

He said that the technician did not return but he spoke to him on the phone that same night. He said he saw Maitland briefly again that night, when he (Maitland) came to his door. The neighbour said he was in his apartment at the time and went to the door to see Maitland, to tell him that he was going to bed. According to him, Maitland said, “Alright, get some sleep”.

The neighbour told the court that Maitland did not say why he was at his door but pointed out that he had earlier tried to call Maitland but didn’t reach him.

“I closed the door and went to bed,” the witness said.

The neighbour told the court that he remembered Friday, July 15, 2022.

He said that morning, he had been working remotely from a cafe and Maitland called him.

Prior to speaking to him, Maitland had attempted to call him three times.

He said that when he spoke to Maitland, the policeman again asked him about the camera footage and if all the footage would still be available. The witness claimed that he told Maitland that the footage on the camera would be in the system memory.

He said he didn’t see Maitland that day.

The neighbour told the court that on Saturday, July 16, 2022 he received multiple missed calls from Maitland. He said he eventually answered a call from the police constable.

He told the court that he deliberately did not answer the calls because he was trying to avoid talking to Maitland. However, he said he decided to answer one of the calls that came in between 11:00 am and midday.

“I deliberately missed the calls earlier because at that point, I would have become familiar with the situation. I became aware of a situation through the news media as well as through my mother who called me about it, having seen it on the news media,” he said.

He said that on the Saturday when he answered the call from Maitland, the constable asked him if the police came to his apartment what would be the plan.

“I told him I was feeling very uncomfortable about the entire situation and that it was unlikely I would be at home,” he testified.

He claimed that Maitland was concerned about the police getting access to his (the neighbour’s) apartment. According to him, that was the very last conversation he had with Maitland.

The neighbour said he was subsequently contacted by a co-worker on July 20, 2022. The co-worker relayed a message to him via Microsoft Teams. He said that within 10 minutes of receiving that message, he made contact with a high-ranking member of the police force.

The neighbour said he recalled giving a statement to Indecom on July 21, 2022.

“I made arrangements for Indecom to come to my apartment to collect the video recording system. They collected the entire device,” he said, pointing out that he was the one who gave the individuals from Indecom access to his apartment.

He explained that he remembered telling the court that on the video footage captured on the July, 11, 2022 he he had seen a female emerge from a BMW, which he referred to as Maitland’s car.

He told the court that he could not validate whether or not he had ever seen or spoken to Donaldson. He did, however, admit to knowing the mother of Maitland’s child.