State argues Blackman planned murder; defence says no proof of conspiracy

The prosecution in the murder trial of Shakira Blackman told a jury on Thursday that the accused had planned to kill Shanice Miller. But the defence urged jurors to weigh whether the evidence instead revealed Miller to be a real threat to Blackman.

Closing arguments in the case were delivered in the No. 4 Supreme Court.

Blackman, of Park Road, Bush Hall, St Michael, is charged with murdering 27-year-old Miller, formerly of Kensington New Road, of the same parish, on November 28, 2021.

In his address, Acting Director of Public Prosecutions Alliston Seale SC, who presented the State’s case with State Counsel Maya Kellman and Paul Prescod, told jurors that the evidence showed that Miller’s killing was premeditated.

“A picture paints a thousand words. You have pictures, you have videos and those are most important to this case…. It is there live, in living color. You will see the last moments of Shanice Miller’s life,” he said.
Seale urged the jury to consider the videos shown in court, specifically the “point out”, the interview, and the stabbing incident on November 27, 2021.

He said Blackman had told police that Miller was by the salon door when she exited a taxi, and she wondered what the deceased was doing there, waiting for her.

“But the video shows you that Shanice was not waiting on her. She was walking up the road, past the same door…with a phone in one hand and two white bags with her bread and two. (Miller) wasn’t paying her no mind and she telling we she was frighten for this woman and that this woman stopped by the door and she expects you to believe that,” Seale argued.

The prosecutor pointed to the evidence presented by State witnesses, in particular that of the female taxi driver who picked up Blackman that morning and took her to James Street. He noted that in her testimony, the driver said she had waved at Miller, whom she knew, and when asked, the accused told her “I getting out here”.

“You are not saying at that stage ‘She does trouble me all the time. I am not getting out, go to Central Police Station’. You are in the sanctity of a van that you don’t have to get out, but you get out of the van because you knew what you were going to do. This is a woman that was terrifying you in life, and that people were getting the impression ‘I couldn’t walk in peace’, but yet you jump out of a van armed with a knife,” Seale continued.

He also cited the post-mortem presented by the forensic pathologist, who determined that Miller’s death was a result of multiple hypovolemic shocks due to multiple stab wounds.

“She believes that you all are gullible enough to let her kill a whole woman in circumstances like this and then tell she ‘Man, go long. De girl used to trouble her’. We would really do that in Barbados?” the senior counsel stated.

In his arguments, King’s Counsel Andrew Pilgrim, who represents Blackman, along with defence attorney Martie Garnes, told the jury that it must consider the context of the case, referencing the 2019 fight in Bridgetown involving the accused, the deceased and another woman.

“The real question is ‘What do you feel when you are on your back with your head in a gutter and two people are standing up on your face and neck?…. You all have to put yourselves in the context—what does that mean? You all saw the video. Did it look like they were making sport with her? Did it look like they were joking around? Context is important,” the senior attorney stated.

He pointed to the accounts given by the accused and witnesses that Miller was observed driving behind Blackman’s work truck on one occasion. Another time, Pilgrim said, she made a gun sign with her fingers and threatened to kill his client.

“Is that context sufficiently serious that you should think to yourself, what is going on? You have to ask yourself what does the background in this case mean? What do those incidents mean? Is it unreasonable for Shakira to say to herself, ‘I am afraid of this woman,’ or is she justified in saying, ‘This is a real threat to me’? If a person who has beaten you and threatened to kill you is now walking behind a van that you are travelling in, they stop and they look inside the van—because remember it was COVID and all the windows are down—should you say to yourself this person is not a threat?” he asked the jury to ponder.

Pilgrim pointed out that due to the lack of other camera footage and the fact that the security camera on which the incident was captured was fixed in one direction, no one knew if Miller had come from the salon.
He also asked why the police had not interviewed the hairdresser.

“How do you prove that there was this conspiracy to kill?” Pilgrim submitted.

The defence attorney also made reference to WhatsApp messages presented to the court by the digital forensic examiner, including one stating, ‘I gine mek nuff complains’. He argued that since those messages had been sent the night before the incident, “when was she going to put in these complaints?”

“The judge will tell you that people are entitled to protect themselves if they feel genuinely threatened,” Pilgrim told the jury. “If I believe that honestly I am under threat from a person, then I can take steps to avert that.
“Ask yourself if there was a real threat.”

Madam Justice Laurie-Anne Smith-Bovell will deliver her summation on August 6 before sending the jury to deliberate.