THE Crown on Monday continued to call witnesses to satisfy the legal requirements for a dead witness’s statement to be tendered and admitted into evidence in the ongoing trial of 25 alleged members of the Klansman gang now unfolding in the Home Circuit Division of the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston.

Shanice Roberts, who died of complications from COVID-19 and kidney failure in February 2021, had provided a statement to cops ahead of her demise regarding the Friday, February 7, 2020 murder of a man called Noah Smith at Yarico Place in St Andrew. That statement is the subject of a Section 31 (D) application by the Crown. The application under the Evidence Act allows the Crown to introduce statements as evidence in court when the witness cannot testify live — usually due to death, illness, being abroad, or being unable to be found after reasonable efforts. The offences are contained in counts 15 and 16 of the indictment.

The accused — Michael Wildman, Jerome Spike, Nashuan Guest, and Geovaughni McDonald — are on trial for “knowingly facilitating the commission” of the robbery and murder.

Last week the prosecution called a detective corporal who said she was one of several officers responding to the scene as well as an associate of Smith, on the counts. They further called an acquaintance of the dead woman who indicated that Roberts had been a dancer.

According to that witness, who was tasked with identifying Roberts from a photograph which was entered into evidence, the dead woman did not work in Kingston permanently but had been in the parish just to do “one gig”. Asked whether she knew if Roberts’s employer was Noah Smith the witness said, “I don’t know the name of the person she worked with.” She was, however, prevented from answering a question from defence attorney Paul Gentles about whether Roberts had told her “the type of work she did in Kingston”, after the prosecution objected.

On Monday, a detective constable taking the stand for the first time said he, along with two other cops, had made their way to the location of the incident on the night in question. He said upon arrival he saw the body of Smith “towards the kitchen area” of the premises “lifeless, hands bound, and lying in a pool of blood”.

According to the cop who said he was the one to cordon the area, he spoke to “several persons who were at the location at the time the incident was taking place”. The detective constable further said there were women working at the location, five of whom he saw that night, among them Roberts, who he said he spoke to.

The lawman said he spoke to the woman for five minutes on the scene, at which point he took notes before again talking to her for over two hours at Constant Spring Police Station where he recorded a statement from her in the presence of an observer, as required by rule. According to the cop, Roberts, during that encounter, appeared “distraught”.

In going further at the request of the Crown to detail how he would be able to recognise Roberts if he saw her again, the detective constable said the woman’s facial features, marked by a very small nose, were his identifying details. When the prosecution attempted to have the dead woman’s statement tendered and admitted as an exhibit and its contents read into the records, objections were raised by the defence.

“It was our hope that, if the Crown were successful, that the Crown would have taken the opportunity to edit [the statement] to keep out the hearsay… because there is a lot of hearsay which we wanted to see that it is properly edited to keep out the hearsay,” stated defence attorney Denise Hinson, who represents the accused Nashaun Guest who is named on the count.

Further objections were also voiced by attorney Sasha-Kay Shaw, who was opposed to the “method by which” the Crown wanted the document admitted, arguing that there was a written notice required by statute.

After the prosecution countered, saying there was no such requirement, Shaw doubled down, indicating that she wished to make a written submission on her objection.

Trial judge Justice Dale Palmer, while noting “I will confess it is a novel submission” indicated that the court would hear the submission by Shaw.

In the meantime, Hinson later challenged the witness’ confirmation of the photo as being that of Roberts, saying the document was too blurry for him to even see her nose.

“It is blurry,” the cop admitted.

“Because it is blurry, the size and shape of the nose is not distinguishable,” Hinson pointed out.

“That’s because of how it is printed,” the lawman replied.

“That’s not your business, officer, I am saying to you that the photo that was printed, the size and shape of the nose is not distinguishable,” Hinson countered.

“It is distinguishable,” the cop insisted.

Some moments later Hinson went on to insist that the cop’s identification of Roberts had been informed by him being told the reason for his evidence.

“It is my suggestion that whatever photograph was placed in your hand today, you have agreed that it was Miss Roberts,” the attorney stated.

“Those are the features of Miss Roberts that I recalled from the time I recorded her statement,” the cop retorted.

When Hinson went further to say, “It is my suggestion that you don’t know whether the person you recorded the statement from in 2020 is in fact the same person whose photograph you were shown, you don’t know for sure, that’s my suggestion,” the cop seemingly murmured “No…” sending a ripple of shocked murmurs around the courtroom.

Several tense moments later, after the assistant director of public prosecutions, eliciting his evidence, requested that the cop’s microphone be isolated and replayed through the electronic recording system, it became clear that his actual response had been “It’s her photo.” He then went on to add, “I said ‘no’ based on looking at the distortion… of the photo.”

The cop will continue his evidence this morning when the matter resumes at 10:00.