BASSETERRE, St. Kitts - DEFENCE COUNSEL in the murder case against Randy Taylor and Lennox 'Len' Gumbs are putting up a vicious fight and skimming through every detail being put forward by the Prosecution.
Taylor and Gumbs are currently on trial for the execution-style murder of 19-year-old Trevis Henville at Upper Shaw Avenue in McKnight on the morning of April 17, 2012.
Leading the prosecution team is Acting Director of Public Prosecution Rhonda Nisbett-Browne who has, so far, called on several Police Officers to give evidence in the matter which began last Tuesday (Jul. 9).
Each Officer placed in the witness box was thoroughly cross examined by defence counsel Chesley Hamilton and Dr. Henry Browne QC, who were ably assisted by Hesketh Benjamin.
The first Officer on the stand was Constable Damian Challenger who is attached to the Crime Scene Unit (CSU).
He testified to photographing the body of Trevis Henville and all wounds sustained on the morning of the killing. He also testified to the processing of the crime scene and the process of having the photos printed.
An issue of non-disclosure was raised by Attorney Hamilton who argued that he had not received a copy of the photos in a timely manner, and that adequate time was not given for him to peruse them.
Time was however permitted for the defence team to examine the photos, after which Challenger explained the images in each.
The Officer was then cross examined by Dr. Browne who questioned why Henville's body was lying face down in one photo and face up in another.
Challenger answered that following the pronouncement of the body dead by the District Medical Officer, he had to move it in order to examine and photograph it.
Challenger was also questioned about a bloody number cone seen in another photo, to which he replied that the wind had blown it into the pool of blood from Henville's body.
It was revealed that no firearm was found to match the bullet casings and that no one sought to find out whose bicycle was seen in a photo or how blood got onto its seat.
Also testifying in this case was Officer Dexter Lawrence who is attached to the Criminal Investigative Department (CID).
He gave evidence as to the arrest of Taylor and Gumbs.
In his evidence in chief, Lawrence said that he saw and spoke to Gumbs at the CID office on the same day of the murder.
He said he identified himself to Gumbs as an Officer in plain clothing and told him he was making inquiries into the death of Henville in which he was allegedly involved.
The Officer told the Court that he also informed him of his right to contact a lawyer, family member or friend before he said anything, and Gumbs' response was: "I was home all morning waiting for my son to take him to school."
He stated that Gumbs was later formally arrested and charged for the murder of Henville.
Lawrence then testified that he also saw and spoke to Taylor on the same day of Henville's murder and, after identifying himself to him [Taylor] and informing him of his rights, his reply was: "I was home all morning."
Taylor, he said, was formally arrested and charged with Henville's killing that same day.
The CID Officer testified that he took copies of both warrants and endorsed them with his signature and date.
Defence counsel raised an issue with the dates on the warrants as Lawrence had testified that the young men were arrested on the April 17 but the warrants stated April 18.
During cross examination, Dr. Browne continuously raised an issue about the notes taken by Lawrence when Gumbs was interviewed.
He questioned the Officer as to the reason for him not bringing the notes with him, and his reply was that he did not see any reason to do so.
Lawrence was questioned at length about whether or not he saw, interviewed, arrested and charged Gumbs on the same day of Henville's murder or the day after.
The Officer maintained that everything was done on the same day, but when shown his deposition with his testimony at the Preliminary Inquiry, it revealed that the formal arrest and charge did occur on April 18.
It was put to Lawrence that Gumbs simply told him: "I was home all day waiting on my son" and his reply was: "Yes, he said that and more."
Browne asked, "Do you have notes on the more he said?" to which Lawrence replied in the negative.
The attorney asked Lawrence if knew where Gumbs lived and if any inquiries were made as to if he were indeed home that day, and the Officer answered in the affirmative. He said he asked persons in the neighbourhood if Gumbs were at home.
Lawrence answered "no" to the questions of if he made any inquiry as to the persons Gumbs lived with and if he interviewed any of them. When asked why he did not, his reply was that there was no need for him to do so, based on the information he had received.
Dr. Browne asked, "Do you accept that if he said he was at home, that is an alibi because he could not be in two places at once?" To that question, Lawrence said, "Yes".
The CID Officer was asked if he deemed his investigation thorough, fair, just and complete. To that question he also answered in the affirmative.
Lastly, Dr. Browne asked, "Do you accept that you had a duty to investigate whether or not Gumbs was at home?" and Lawrence once again said "yes".
Other Police Officers also testified and the defence counsel picked at every discrepancy in an effort to maintain their clients' innocence.
