0

Woman Denies Telling Police Drugs Were Owned By Defendant

By LAMECH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

ljohnson@tribunemedia.net

A WOMAN accused along with a contractor of possessing drugs with intent to supply denied she told police the narcotics belonged to Carlos Lamm.

Laticha McKenzie, of Pinewood Gardens, said from the witness stand last Friday that despite the claims of a police sergeant, she did not say: “That ain’t mine. This is Carlos’ own.”

Lamm, of Bernard Road, is accused with McKenzie of possessing three and a half pounds of marijuana on March 9, 2009. Both deny the charge.

“On March 9, 2009 at around 8am, where were you?” attorney Murrio Ducille asked his client on Friday.

“I was in Fox Hill, Grace Terrace” McKeznie answered.

“And on that day, were you arrested by police?” the attorney asked.

She answered “Yes sir.”
Mr Ducille queried if she understood what officers asked her during her arrest concerning possession of dangerous drugs.

“Of course I didn’t know what they were talking about,” McKenzie answered.

“You did a record of interview?” Mr Ducille asked.

The accused answered yes and said she could identify it by her signature if given the opportunity.

“What you said in that record of interview, was it true?” Mr Ducille asked.

“Yes sir,” McKenzie answered.

Lamm’s attorney, Jiaram Mangra, cross-examined McKenzie first, asking who she was with at the house off Grace Terrace.

She named her four-year-old daughter and Carlos Lamm.

McKenzie could not say how far Grace Terrace was located from Lamm’s house, which she said was on a hill.

“Sgt Thompson, in his evidence, said when you were arrested you said to him: ‘That ain’t mines. This is Carlos’ own.’

“Did you say that?” Lamm’s attorney asked.

“No sir,” McKenzie said.

“He [Sgt Thompson] never made any notation of what you allegedly said and asked you to sign?” the attorney inquired further.

“No sir,” the woman answered.

Still under cross-examination, McKenzie said she and her daughter were being dropped to work and school respectively by Lamm.

“Did the police intercept you or try to stop the car at any time coming down Grace Terrace?” Mr Mangra asked.

McKenzie said the three and another passenger, Ted Mackey, were driving past St Augustines College in a lot of traffic when “a gentleman” tried to open a door of the rental car they were in.\

“I showed Carlos this,” she said. “He turned around to go up St Augustines Hill. He went up the hill around the church hall.”

She then told Mr Mangra she believed Mackey tossed something out the back window.

“I don’t know what he had thrown out the window, but a white substance came out,” she said.

McKenzie said she had given her then boyfriend, Lamm, a white plastic bag to hold, which contained her daughter’s frozen Lunchables meal and Capri Sun juice.

“In your interview with police, you indicated that police started to chase you after Carlos turned around?” Mr Mangra asked.

“Yes,” McKenzie answered.

“Did you see a marked police vehicle follow you at any time?” the attorney asked.

“No,” she answered.
ASP Ercell Dorsett, the prosecutor, cross-examined McKenzie next.

“Isn’t it true that there were three persons in the car?” he asked.

“It was four persons,” the woman answered.

“The windows were tinted?” the prosecutor asked.

“At the time, I didn’t bother to check,” McKenzie answered.

“This car went in the monastery yard?” the ASP asked.

“No sir,” she answered.
The prosecutor asked for the woman to look over her statement, then asked: “You’re saying that the first time you saw the police was when the car stopped. Is that true?”

“No,” she answered, adding that she didn’t know they were police until they took her into custody.

“Carlos is your boyfriend?” the prosecutor asked.

“At the time, yes,” she answered.

“Father of your daughter?” the prosecutor asked.

She answered yes.
“You loved him dearly?” ASP Dorsett asked.

The witness again said yes.
“You would do anything for him?” the prosecutor asked.

McKenzie said, “No”.
“Then you don’t love him dearly,” the prosecutor suggested.

“I love my daughter dearly,” the woman responded.

“You heard Mr Penneman say that Mr Lamm got out of the car and ran?” the prosecutor asked.

McKenzie said yes.
“While it was still in motion?” the ASP asked.

The accused said yes.

“Did you see Carlos move away from a moving car?” the ASP asked.

“Yes I did,” McKenzie answered.

“I suggest that you and Carlos Lamm had drugs in the car that morning,” the prosecutor said.

“No sir,” McKenzie answered.

“And once the police started chasing you, that is when the bag was thrown out of the car,” ASP Dorsett suggested.

“No sir,” the defendant answered.

“You’re here today to try to cover up for Carlos about when you first saw the police,” the prosecutor said, but the accused dismissed the suggestion.

After ASP Dorsette’s cross-examination, Carlos Lamm was called to the stand.

However, Mr Ducille asked for an adjournment, and told the court that it had been nearly half a day since he had eaten.

The prosecutor made a comment about this being a common problem from the attorney and the two had an exchange of words before being reprimanded by the Deputy Chief Magistrate.
The matter was ajourned to November 5.

Both Lamm and McKenzie remain on $10,000 bail.

Comments

lynx28 6 years, 8 months ago

Not only is this story poorly written, it is also factually incorrect. Laticha McKenzie testified on October 9. Why is your reporter trying to give the impression that the story is more current than it really is?

0

Sign in to comment