On day-eight of the Klansman trial the prosecution’s first witness detailed how the gang, under the orders of Andre Bryan, burned down three branches of a financial institution to send a message to the proprietor to pay extortion money.
The alleged incident occurred in 2017.
Thirty three people including one woman are on trial for multiple offences under the anti-gang legislation.
The trial is being presided over by Chief Justice Bryan Sykes.
Stevian Simmonds has been covering the trial in the Home Circuit Court.
The witness says the planning for that incident started when one gang member whose alias is City Puss, told Bryan he called the proprietor of the firm and he refused to cooperate.
He says City Puss was speaking on the phone as usual.
The witness says City Puss suggested the gang members burn down the store to get the attention of the business owner.
He says himself, Bryan, Stephanie, Crux and Mackeral started planning how to set fire to the business place.
The witness says he recalled Bryan saying:
“Him affi cooperate else him caahn do nuh bizniz inside Spanish Town”.
He says he and another gangster he called Frazzle drove in separate cars to quote ‘run d road’.
“Run d road” he said, meant ensuring no police officers were in sight, clearing the way for the others to strike.
He says three other gangsters went to the business establishment broke the glass door, threw gasoline all over the inside then set it ablaze.
He says two other branches of the same firm were torched by the gangsters, one in Linstead and another in Old Harbour.
The witness says he met City Puss for the first time in person when he was locked up.
The prosecutors asked him to identify City Puss in the courtroom.
But one of the defense attorneys objected saying the witness had not established a clear basis on which to identify her client.
The prosecutor asked the witness more questions about City Puss.
The witness says City Puss has a unique voice and sounded like the devil.
But the Chief Justice said unless the Prosecutor can establish a clear basis for which the witness is able to identify the alleged gangster he should refrain from proceeding on that line of questioning.