BASSETERRE, St. Kitts – A man, who was charged with a robbery offence, told the court that he is innocent and could account for his whereabouts on the night the alleged act was committed.
Kenrick ‘KiKi’ Thomas of Upper College Street, according to the prosecution, committed the offence on April 16, 2009 against Chere-Anne Caines, who was at the time residing in Nevis Street. The prosecution alleges that on that night, Thomas approached Caines while she was on her way home, put a gun to her head and robbed her of a 14k gold Cuban-link neck chain, valued at US$1 000.
Caines, the first of two witnesses, testified that she knows the accused and at about 11:15 on that day she was on her way home and had reason to walk through the basketball court in Dorset, where she saw the accused sitting in a chair among other individuals. She said he was clothed in a three-quarter jean pants, a white shirt and a black T-shirt over it.
She explained that her route took her to College Street Ghaut and she made two stops before getting to her Nevis Street home. Further, in accordance with her testimony, Caines said she saw the accused in the College Street Ghaut twice before she made her way onto Nevis Street.
Caines explained that when she got to her house, she decided to make her way down the road to get a top up for her phone, but after recognising the late hour she went back home.
The virtual complainant further explained that before she entered her house, she saw the accused when he emerged from under her neighbour’s wall, advanced, placed a black gun to her head and made a demand.
“I said, ‘Boy what ah do you? Me and you aine in nuttn’. He said, ‘Give me’, and I said, ‘Give you what?’ He said (it) again. While he was saying (it), he kept pointing the gun to my head and I kept moving his hand (which was holding the gun) away from my head. When he said it the third time, he took the chain off my neck,” she told the court.
Caines explained that during the incident, the accused was clad in the same attire earlier seen at the basketball court, with the only difference being the black T-shirt was tied around his face. Notwithstanding this, she was able to identify him and also recognise his voice during the verbal exchange they had while the incident was in progress.
Resultant of the incident, Caines noted that she was scared for her life and proceeded to walk to her neighbour’s house from which she was provided transportation to the Basseterre Police Station, where she filed a report.
Thomas, who provided evidence for the jury’s consideration, maintained that the virtual complainant fabricated her story, as he is not the one she saw at the basketball court prior to the incident or was he the one who robbed her at gunpoint.
According to Thomas, he was at his girlfriend’s house from 3:00 that afternoon until the following morning and did not visit the basketball court. He said he remembered being at his girlfriend’s house on that particular day because that was the same day his girlfriend’s mother caught him hiding in her bedroom closet. Thomas noted that even after being caught, his girlfriend’s mother allowed him to spend the remainder of the night there. He explained that his girlfriend’s father is the one who had a problem with him spending the night at her home, but he was not there on that particular night.
Thomas’ girlfriend provided evidence on his behalf and, while she substantiated parts of his statement, there were a number of conflicting points.
She confirmed that Thomas was found hiding in her closet by her mother and that he spent the night there. However, the conflicting aspect of her testimony was when she told the court that not only was he at the basketball court on that night, but she also met him there at about 7:00 p.m. She again contradicted Thomas’ testimony when she said that he arrived at her home at about 8:00 that evening and not 3:00 p.m. as he had indicated.
The accused also testified that the one and only time that he slept at his girlfriend’s home was on the night of the alleged incident. His girlfriend however declared that he did so regularly.
Sometime during the course of today, the jury is expected to either pronounce guilt on Thomas or maintain his presumed innocence.
