PROSECUTORS in the trial of 28 alleged members of the Klansman Gang said Tuesday that the prison records being counted on by several defence attorneys to prove that their clients were in custody when several crimes allegedly linked to them were committed cannot be relied on by the court in the final analysis.

Attorneys for accused Peter Miller, Kalifa Williams, Donovan Richards and Tareek James have contended that their clients could not have participated in the murders and shootings tied to them by the Crown as they were behind bars at the times stated in the indictment which charges them.

However, prosecutors in making their closing address said the records in question from the Horizon Adult Remand Centre and Spanish Town Police Station could not stand up to scrutiny.

“We have noted that the records are scattered among many different books. We have had records from admissions books, an alphabet book, a penal records book and a DNR (for accused who did not return from court) book,” a senior prosecutor contended. According to the prosecution, the records seem to be done without any cross reference to the varying books.

“Many of the records do not identify who is the maker of the entry in the case of the persons from Horizon [Remand Centre]. We have seen that the overseer, identified by handwriting, made a particular endorsement in relation to the accused Pete Miller. On that same record where he signed there is an endorsement made in that space, which is not signed, and it cannot be ascertained who made that record,” the court was told.

Furthermore, prosecutors said defence attorneys had led no evidence as to how the accuracy of the records are determined, pointing out that the Evidence Act places a duty on them to satisfy the court in this respect.

The Crown also contended that the staff officers gave differing accounts about the documentation procedures. According to the prosecutors, this was especially so in respect of the DNR book where one corrections officer said that the book is updated on the same day the accused are dispatched for court and another saying the book is updated the day after.

The presentation of evidence relating to the records had been the reason for at least two adjournments earlier this month. In one instance trial judge Chief Justice Bryan Sykes adjourned in a huff merely 11 minutes into the sitting after learning that defence attorneys and prosecutors did not follow his instructions to peruse the admission records from the Horizon Adult Remand Centre for the accused who were held there to prevent that from being done on the court’s time.

In the meantime, the Crown, in its parting shot, pressed the trial judge to reject the good character evidence of the accused and accept instead the evidence of the two accomplices, witness number one and witness number two – former gang members turned State witnesses, instead.

Twenty-six of the remaining 28 accused, through a combination of sworn and unsworn statements, insisted that they were industrious and law-abiding citizens, while two opted to remain silent.

According to the Crown, witness number one, who took the initiative and approached the police to provide information which prompted the investigation and subsequent arrests was sufficiently credible to corroborate the evidence in the case.

They further urged the court to accept as “relevant evidence” the voice recordings of alleged cellular phone conversations between the supposed gangsters, arguing that it was established that the individuals on the calls who in cases identified themselves by their names and monikers had an established relationship with each other and were clearly part of the criminal organisation.

According to the Crown, the conversations which were played into the records of the court showed that the witness was familiar with the various players, based on the friendly manner in which they spoke.

“What is established is that the parties have a relationship with each other which shows familiarity, and to an extent some amount of affection. In addition, persons such as [the sole female accused] Stephanie Christie, o/c Mumma, Jermaine Robinson and Jason Brown self-identify during the recordings. The conversations show [witness number one] relating in a familiar, knowing and friendly manner to the persons he spoke to during these calls. In this case the names and contacts in the phones were captured by the witness and placed in the phones by him. In that respect that evidence stands apart and independently from the Crown’s data records supplied by the telecommunications companies,” the senior prosecutor argued.

The Crown in September of last year opened its case with 33 accused in the docks originally. They said the accused individuals, which comprise the “Blackman faction” of the gang under the supposed leadership of Andre “Blackman” Bryan, had various roles in which they acted as “killers, drivers, lookout men or watchmen, gunsmiths and foot soldiers”. According to the Crown, the accused between 2015 and 2019 carried out a range of murders, conspiracies to murder and extortion and arson throughout the parish.

The accused are being tried under the Criminal Justice (Suppression of Criminal Organisations) (Amendment) Act, commonly called the anti-gang legislation with several facing additional charges under the Firearms Act for crimes allegedly committed between 2015 and 2019. All the accused, when arraigned on September 20 at the start of the trial, pleaded “not guilty” to the charges against them. They are charged with offences ranging from being part of a criminal organisation, murder, conspiracy to murder, arson, illegal possession of firearm to illegal possession of ammunition.

The matter continues this morning at 10:00 in the Home Circuit Division of the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston.