Supreme Court judge Justice Dale Palmer was on Thursday forced to repeat his warning of contempt of court proceedings for anyone found to be video recording or photographing any of the 25 accused in the ongoing trial of the so-called Tesha Miller faction of the Klansman gang.

Palmer issued the caution after a second complaint was made by two members of the defence bar following concerns raised by two defendants who claimed that they were the focus of video recordings by a police officer on Tuesday morning as they were being escorted to the courtroom for the start of that day’s proceedings.

Defence attorney Denise Hinson alerted the trial judge about the complaints in the stead of colleague attorney Abina Morris to whom the defendants had spoken. She said Morris was unable to be at Thursday’s sitting and so had asked her to convey the concern.

“We are constrained to ask this court again, to remind the officers that it is not permitted, that it is highly improper and that it may affect the sterility of the trial and any proceedings beyond here. The officers need to be very mindful and that is not behaviour that ought to be tolerated,” Hinson said in addressing Justice Palmer.

She said Morris, after the complaint was made, had made her own observations before accosting the cop in the presence of the detention officers and the inspector who was on duty that morning.

Relaying what had occurred to the trial judge, Hinson said Morris told her that the cop videoed one of the accused while he was being escorted up the stairs and then arranged his phone in his pocket to seemingly capture the other accused when he was being brought up.

“It is something that continues to concern us,” she stated.

Justice Palmer, noting that the camera footage from the court’s security system could be “checked” to verify the claims, said, “There was a complaint raised before, a very clear instruction was given that this is not to be countenanced and anybody that does it knows that it is in breach of the court’s rules and so it would be contempt of the court’s order. I gave the order and if it is that it is breached by anyone, I am the one that should carry out the enforcement of the court’s order. It would be a contempt of the court’s order.”

Responding to concerns by the prosecution as to “the manner in which” the concerns were raised, the trial judge said he was correctly placed to address them.

“I had indicated previously that while I believe it should not have required the court’s order, I indicated, in what I believed were unequivocal terms, that this was not something the court would countenance. I am going to determine whether or not there is camera feed that can assist us because if it is that it did occur, it is something that the court does not treat lightly.

“Its orders are not to be treated lightly and I don’t know what purpose it can be used for, I don’t know what the intention is, I don’t know what the evidence is to come, I don’t know if it relates to this matter at all, but if it is that I made an explicit order that it’s not to be done, it is a breach of the court’s order if it is done,” Justice Palmer reiterated.

On Thursday, the inspector who was on duty on the day in question, in addressing Justice Palmer, said a formal complaint was not made to her but she was in the vicinity when the cop in question was being addressed by Morris. She said the cop explained that the way his phone was positioned with the camera on, was his usual way of carrying the device.

“My instructions, Milord, is that once the complaint was made to her [Morris], she confronted the officer [in the presence of this inspector] and he actually did not deny it. She spoke sternly to the officer to indicate that it is a court order and it is not to be tolerated,” Hinson countered.

Justice Palmer, following the indications by the inspector, repeated his warnings for all concerned.

“I don’t know if it’s necessary to repeat it, I believe my prior indication was clear and unequivocal; there is to be no recording of any image or footage in relation to any of the defendants at any stage, at any location. I can see no basis on which to do so. I repeat the warning or the caution I had given. I have no difficulty with enforcing the court’s orders if it is that it’s shown to have been breached,” he stated.

This is not the first time such concerns have surfaced.

In March this year, weeks after the trial began, several accused complained that cops assigned to the courts were taking their photos and making videos whilst the hearing was in session.

The explanation then, after queries were made, was that the Jamaica Constabulary Force’s communications arm had been compiling a feature on the work of its Specialised Operations team at various locations where they are deployed.

Justice Palmer, who at the time had requested that the material be submitted to him so he could scrutinise it, issued orders indicating that “the taking of images or making of video recordings in these proceedings of anyone, unless the court permits, is strictly prohibited”.

“It will attract contempt proceedings if it is that it is found to be done without the court’s permission,” Justice Palmer warned then.

In the meantime, the trial has been adjourned until next Tuesday when the Crown will continue calling witnesses.

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.