The Tribune

By LAMECH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

ljohnson@tribunemedia.net

A WARRANT of arrest has been issued for one of three men standing trial in connection with the fatal stabbing of a CV Bethel student.

Kendario Bain was notably absent from yesterday’s proceedings before Senior Justice Stephen Isaacs where he, Owen McKenzie and Donald Nottage were expected to indicate whether they would remain silent or give sworn evidence concerning the day in which Jamil Wilchcombe was murdered.

Wilchcombe was killed on February 21, 2008.

Bain and McKenzie are charged with Wilchcombe’s murder while all three are alleged to have caused harm to his brother, Lee-Sanchez Dormeus. Nottage is also alleged to have attempted to rob Mr Dormeus of a Verizon Z3 GSM cellular phone.

Dormeus, then 16, left school that afternoon to go to a nearby barbershop on East Street South when a young man reportedly attempted to take his cellular phone from him. This led to a fight between the two and two other young men joined in to attack Dormeus.

His 17-year-old brother, Wilchcombe, got involved, but was fatally stabbed.

Roger Thompson is prosecuting the case while lawyers Ian Cargill, Michael Kemp and Wallace Rolle are defending the three accused men against the charges they have denied committing.

The 12-member jury was called into the courtroom at 11.45am yesterday where Senior Justice Isaacs apologised for the near two-hour delay of the proceedings.

He noted that there were only two accused in the dock and would have offered an explanation, adding “but I’ll proceed with the trial.”

Addressing McKenzie and Nottage, he informed the two that the prosecution had closed its case and they had the option of giving sworn testimony from the witness stand or remaining silent as is their legal right.

“M’lord, my client (Nottage) had elected to remain silent,” said Mr Rolle.

Mr Cargill said: “I have no instructions m’lord.”

Mr Kemp said McKenzie would take the stand and after taking the oath, was asked if he could spell the word statement. McKenzie said he couldn’t, but was asked to try.

“S-T-A-E-T-M-A-E-N-T,” answered McKenzie.

Mr Kemp asked for McKenzie’s statement to police to be shown to him. When this was done, the lawyer asked him if he wrote what was on the document.

The defendant said he was “forced to write them”. He went on to name the investigating officers he said had brutalised him in custody.

“Did you kill anybody?” asked Mr Kemp.

McKenzie said he did not and also said he didn’t instruct anyone to kill on the day in question.

“Why’d you show up for today’s case?” asked the lawyer.

“It’s my trial date,” said McKenzie.

When asked what he recalled of the day in question, McKenzie said he was at the South Beach plaza walking to the area of the Chinese takeout when he saw a crowd.

He said he saw school kids “ganging up on a boy”.

He added: “When I saw Tino (Nottage) was getting gang, I ended up kicking one of the fellows off him and started fighting with him.”

The accused said it was at this time that students began throwing rocks and he retaliated in the same manner before he and Nottage fled from the area.

“Did you see anyone get stab?” asked Mr Kemp. McKenzie said he did not. He said he didn’t know who stabbed Wilchcombe.

In cross-examination by Mr Thompson, McKenzie was asked if he had ever lied before. The accused said he had, but denied that he was lying when he said he did not stab anyone.

While he admitted that he was friendly with the two accused, he denied that one of them, Bain, passed him a knife on the day in question.

He also denied stabbing the victim.

Mr Kemp closed his client’s case following the cross-examination of McKenzie.

“Mr Cargill,” Senior Justice Isaacs said to Bain’s lawyer, “Mr Kemp and Mr Rolle have closed their cases.”

“I have no instructions m’lord,” said Mr Cargill.

Following closing arguments from Crown and defence counsel, the judge issued a warrant of arrest for Bain who could not be located by relatives and the police.

The case resumes Wednesday at 10.30am when the judge is expected to summarise the evidence of the case before excusing the jury to deliberate on a verdict concerning the three accused.