A witness on Monday admitted that she was briefed by prosecutor Kathy-Ann Pyke on the questions she was likely to be asked on the witness stand during the Home Circuit Court murder trial of six policemen.

On trial are Sergeant Simroy Mott, Corporal Donovan Fullerton and Constables Andrew Smith, Sheldon Richards, Orandy Rose and Richard Lynch. Corporal Fullerton is also charged with making a false statement to the Independent Commission of Investigations (Indecom).

The cops are on trial in relation to the January 12, 2013 shooting deaths of Matthew Lee, Mark Allen and Ucliffe Dyer on Acadia Drive in Barbican, St Andrew.

The witness, while under cross-examination by defence attorney Hugh Wildman, said the prosecutor was simply preparing her when they met in the presence of a senior Indecom personnel in a convenient space adjoining the courtroom last week.

“She was alerting me that if I forgot things, I could always refer to my statement. She was giving me examples because I have never been to court before. She was preparing her witness,” the witness said.

Wildman quipped back, asking, “Preparing her witness? Are you a lawyer? Do you know about the preparation of witnesses?”

The witness said, “No, but I watch Law and Order, which is much more entertaining than this.”

Wildman suggested to the witness that on Law and Order, the television series, prosecutors don’t tell witnesses what questions to expect in court.

Using a biblical analogy, the attorney said that the meeting with the witness, the prosecutor and the Indecom personnel behind closed doors mimicked the private trial that convicted Jesus.

“All three of you were behind closed doors in a room next door here?” Wildman asked.

“All three of us were in the lawyer’s lounge,” the witness responded.

Wildman then asked the witness if they were discussing the evidence she was to give in court.

“We were discussing my statement,” the witness said.

That response prompted Wildman to remark, “Story come to bump.” However, the remark did not sit well with the prosecutor, who raised an objection.

“I am objecting to my friend’s comments and the line of questioning,” Pyke told trial judge Sonia Bertram Linton.

Wildman explained to Bertram Linton that he was conducting his cross-examination and that Pyke should only object on a point of law.

The judge told Wildman to take his seat.

“Your comments are not restricted to law. The record has all your comments so you can’t contradict anybody on that. Your comments are legendary,” Bertram Linton told Wildman.

Pyke sought to impress upon the judge again that she felt the remarks by Wildman were improper. In her own defence, Pyke told the judge that prosecutors have a duty to interview their witnesses.

“What I suggest is that when you have a chance to re-examine, you will be able to raise it because it came up in cross-examination. But in the meantime, the defence has the latitude,” Betram Linton explained.

Wildman then continued to press the witness on the same point.

“So, you were locked behind closed doors in a room?” Wildman asked.

“The door wasn’t locked. You were able to open it and enter,” the witness said.

“So who invited you in that room?” Wildman asked.

“Miss Pyke,” the witness responded.

“Am I correct that the three of you were sitting around a table with the statement in front of you?” Wildman asked.

“You are correct,” the witness said. “We were discussing the statement and the questions that might be asked.

Wildman remarked that the witness’s response was shocking. He asked the witness which part of her statement she reviewed with the prosecutor, and she said the entire statement.

The trial continues on Wednesday.