A detective constable’s “I cannot recall” replies to questions about several elements of a home invasion by two alleged members of the Tesha Miller-led faction of the Klansman gang on Monday drew scepticism from defence attorneys who chided him for recalling on the spur of the moment the expletive he used when ordering them out of his house, but dithering over how many rounds of ammunition he handed over to the Independent Commission of Investigations (Indecom) after the encounter.

The detective constable, who is the tenth prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of 25 alleged members of the gang in the Home Circuit Division of the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston, is also the victim of a February 27, 2020 incident in which the accused Sharn Gilzene and Michael Wildman are charged for “shooting with intent” under count 18 of the 32-count indictment brought by the Crown.

According to the cop, a 27-year veteran of the constabulary force, the encounter happened following his return from a St Andrew School with his daughter and an exchange student from Canada who was to spend time with his family.

The cop said upon returning to his then home at a St Catherine address, he allowed the children to enter the dwelling first while he removed the luggage from his personal vehicle. He told the court that upon settling his visitor and returning to the living room of his home, he saw “the curtain move and two males came in…armed”.

“One of them had a smirk on his face and he said, ‘Nobody move’. I observed they had firearms in their right hands,” the cop said, noting that the pistols looked similar to the one he carried.

According to the lawman, while pulling his service pistol he ordered them to come out of his (expletive) house.

He claimed that when he said this one of the would be assailants,“pushed the other one and she run”, his recollection eliciting chuckles from several of the accused who paid rapt attention.

“They ran through the glass door…I tactically moved towards where they ran, they were retreating but pointing their firearms in the direction I was in, they were going through the grille at the car port at that time, seeing them pointing in my direction I opened gunfire at them, they ran through the outer gate and turned right and I decided I was gonna pursue,” he told the acting assistant director of public prosecutions marshalling the evidence.

He said while taking cover he pursued the men and fired at them at intervals until they entered a white sedan and “drove off very fast and made good their escape”. He said the entire episode was over in about three minutes.

The cop, who said he did not attend an identification parade to point out the men asked to describe them, said one had “a bleached appearance, was slim, about 5’8” and was in his mid-to late 20s, while the other wore a white T-shirt and was about the same height.

Defence attorney Abina Morris, who represents the accused Gilzene, in cross-examining the cop wanted to know how many rounds of ammunition he had when he reported for work that day. When he indicated 26, the attorney went on to ask whether anything else had occurred that day which resulted in him discharging his weapon.

“I can’t recall,” the cop replied.

“Can you recall how many rounds you had left at the end of that day?” the attorney persisted.

“I can’t recall,” the cop answered.

Asked whether he wanted to refresh his memory by reading over his statement which he gave to the police following the incident, the cop after reading that area of the statement twice still could not reply but was saved from doing so following an objection from the prosecution which argued that the way the question was posed was “unfair”.

Morris, in retracting, then asked the lawman whether he had handed over his firearm and the remaining ammunition to Indecom and how many rounds were turned over.

“I fired four,” said the lawman.

“I didn’t ask you how many you fired, I asked you a direct question: How many rounds did you hand in along along with your firearm,” Morris shot back.

“I refreshed my memory, the magazine had 14 rounds and I fired four so that means I am accounting for 10,” the cop said only to have a dissatisfied Morris state, “I didn’t ask you about the magazine, I asked you how many rounds.”

His “it could be about 24…if my memory serves me right”, again evoked laughter from the accused who could be seen conferencing with each other about the lawman’s testimony.

Those chuckles only grew louder when the lawman some minutes later, still under persistent questioning from Morris, said, “I made a mistake, it would be 13 in the magazine; if I fired four it would leave nine; so nine and 13 is 22.”

Asked whether he had told cops that when he checked his pistol after the incident he said “10 9mm cartridges” the cop said “could be mistake”.

Challenged by Morris as to how he made no mention in his statement of telling the men to leave his “expletive” house but could tell the court on Monday, the lawman said “yes because I just remembered”.

“After six years and you don’t remember the count of rounds you had,” Morris countered dryly, to which the cop replied coolly “mistakes do happen”.

Defence attorney Paul Gentles, in further picking apart the detective constable’s evidence, attempted to cast doubt over his account of how many guns were in play and the span of time over which the shooting happened, especially after those questions were met with more “I can’t recall” responses.

Confronting the cop about his switching his statement from telling the police, in the days following the incident, that he would be able to identify the men if he saw them again, to now saying he could not recall their faces, Gentles said, “Wouldn’t you agree with me that that part of your statement wasn’t true?”

“Six years after, I can’t [identify them],” the cop replied, to which the attorney said, “You are very good. I am suggesting to you that you are not a truthful witness.”

“I disagree. I am speaking the truth,” the cop retorted.

The defence will resume its cross-examination this morning when the trial resumes at 10:00 before Supreme Court judge Justice Dale Palmer.

The 25 accused — the second faction of the gang to now be tried by the courts — are to answer to 16 offences allegedly committed over the span of five years between August 2017 and November 2022, according to the case being built by the Crown.