Eyewitness account

Number 2 Supreme Court Justice Randall Worrell today threw out a defence attorney’s application aimed at barring witnesses from mentioning the alias Lord Evil – real name Andre Jackman – when referring to who was in the company of his murder accused client Ryan Omar Samuel on the day of the alleged shooting death of Charley Dume.

Justice Worrell rejected the legal submission from Attorney-at-law Mohia Ma’at that to make a link between Samuel and the nomenclature Lord Evil would prejudice the jury and prevent the accused from receiving a fair trial.

Arguments on this matter by Ma’at and Principal Crown Counsel Alliston Seale took place in the absence of the 12-member jury.

Samuel is on trial for the April 26, 2014, shooting death of Dume at a bar on the corner of Nelson Street and Wellington Street, The City.

And after the accused pleaded not guilty yesterday at the start of the trial, the Crown called its first witness today before the jury of three men and nine women.

Reporters were requested by the prosecution not to use the names of civilian witnesses in this case claiming they feared victimization by certain person or persons.

The first state witness who testified today recalled being outside of the bar sometime after 5 p.m. on the fateful day and saw a car drive up and a group of men got out.

He said he was outside because inside the bar had just been sprayed with insecticide due to the presence of mosquitos.

He said that after about two minutes he went back inside and the men also did.

The witness remembered that a woman also entered the business place and saw somebody throw slippers which she was wearing outside.

He testified that while inside, he and “this rasta guy came face-to-face”.  It was at that point, the witness added, he said he was not paying for chips.

According to his evidence, three or four other men were present including the accused.

“This man said, ‘you know who I am. I am Lord Evil,’” the State witness told the court, adding that he appeared drunk.

He also recalled that “Lord Evil took my hat from my head” and kicked it away. “He told one of the other guys, give me a thousand dollars for the chips,” the witness said.

In response to a question from Prosecutor Seale, the witness informed the court that: “Lord Evil told Charley [the deceased] put eight beers on the counter.”

However, his testimony further revealed that Dume refused, telling him he had enough beers.

“Lord Evil slapped Charley…Charley slapped him back,” the witness continued.

He informed the court that he then heard about eight explosions while pointing to the accused in the dock, who he identified as the “shooter”.

The witness said he lifted up the victim, placed him in his car and took him to the hospital.

He recalled going to the District A Police Station on Station Hill, St Michael where he was questioned by the police and also pointed out the accused during an identification parade.

He said he did not know the accused before the day of the shooting but illustrated to the court that he, Dume, the accused and Jackman were in “very” close proximity to each other leading up to the shooting.

The witness also recalled seeing the accused carrying a haversack on the front of his body and had his hands inside of it before the shooting.

He said nobody else in the bar had a haversack.

But when the witness was cross-examined by the defence counsel, he conceded that he did not see any guns that day, neither did he see anyone holding a gun.

However, in further response to counsel, he testified seeing someone discharge a firearm.

Defence counsel Ma’at accused him of contradicting himself.

But prosecutor Seale quickly interjected and insisted that the attorney could not argue with a witness “if that is what he said.”

The witness also denied a suggestion from the defence lawyer that his client was in the bathroom, when the shooting took place. He also rejected another suggestion that he pushed away “Lord Evil with the intention of separating” him and Dume and that his focus was more on Lord Evil.

The defence counsel also pointed the witness to a number of discrepancies in the description of the accused which he gave the police and his description in court today.

The witness admitted, in response to counsel, that he never included the presence of tattoos in his description of the shooter, explaining that he did not notice any.

He testified that if he had noticed any other significant descriptions that could have helped the police, he would have provided such.

“You have no idea who shot Charley,” Ma’at suggested to the witness.

“I do sir,” the witness replied.

The hearing has been adjourned until 9.30 tomorrow morning.