Chief Justice, Bryan Sykes, highlighted significant discrepancies between evidence presented by the Crown’s two main witnesses in the One Don/Klansman Gang Trial.
Justice Sykes was examining the witnesses’ evidence, concerning counts 11 and 12, murder and conspiracy to murder a man known as ‘Outlaw’. According to Chief Justice Sykes, the narratives are not in accordance.
More in this report from Robian Williams.
The incident purportedly happened on November 2, 2017. The alleged gang leader Andre ‘Blackman’ Bryan, the defendants Tareek James and Carl Beech are charged with conspiracy. But Bryan and James are being accused of murder.
Both the Crown’s key witnesses testified about the planning of the incident. Witness two, who claimed he was the banker of the gang, said the arrangements were made at his home. He said witness number one, who claimed he was the driver for the gang, was active in the planning.
Witness two noted that witness one said he would use ‘Beech’ to carry James to do the shooting. However, witness one said that he questioned the killing of Outlaw and he was never in favour of him to die.
Witness one further testified that Beech was seen on the roadway in the community of Lauriston, when he and James were driving. He said Beech volunteered to carry James to do the shooting.
The evidence suggested that Beech knowingly facilitated a murder.
Chief Justice Sykes however questioned if Beech knew about the existence of a criminal gang at that point. He noted that Beech has no other charge and was never mentioned in any other evidence.
Justice Sykes pointed to another inconsistency, with the events after the shooting allegedly took place.
Witness two said after the shooting they went back to his house. Witness one said witness two drove Bryan to his apartment in Kingston. Justice Sykes says the recollection seems uncertain and in doubt.
He says the inconsistencies are perfect examples of an accomplice minimising their role and magnifying the role of another. He notes that both witnesses said they heard gunshots but didn’t see who did the shooting.
Justice Sykes says the inconsistencies may very well be in favour of the defendant Tareek James, as the question arises as to who actually did the shooting.
Additionally, Justice Sykes highlighted that only three witnesses testified concerning the incident. But no police witness came and no crime scene pictures were presented to support the evidence.
The summation will continue on Wednesday afternoon at 2.