By LAMECH JOHNSON
Tribune Staff Reporter
ljohnson@tribunemedia.net
A LAWYER for one of five persons alleged to have a role in the death of businessman Kurt McCartney probed the criminal history of the prosecution’s key witness yesterday in the Supreme Court.
This line of questioning came after the witness expressed unfamiliarity with the procedures of an identification parade.
Romona Farquharson-Seymour, attorney for Sumya Ingraham, was cross-examining anonymous witness “AB” concerning his recollection of the events that transpired in Gambier Village on October 24, 2013 and his recent identification of her client in court as one of the persons present when Mr McCartney died.
Witness “AB”, who has been giving evidence for five days, said yesterday that he identified two women in an identification parade on November 14, 2013, at the Central Detective Unit as the same women he saw with Thorne Edwards and Okell Farrington in Gambier the night McCartney was killed.
“Did they have numbers?” the lawyer asked.
“No, madam,” the anonymous witness said.
“So how did you pick them out?” Mrs Farquharson-Seymour asked.
“By the description. I told the officer that she was the person I saw,” the witness answered.
“Were you advised that the person you saw may or may not have been on that line?” the lawyer asked.
He was asked what number the woman he claimed to have seen was given. The witness said no numbers were assigned.
“I suggest to you, you’re not being truthful to this court,” the lawyer said.
“I’m not lying to this court,” the witness said.
“Had you been on an ID parade, a number would’ve been assigned,” Mrs Farquharson-Seymour said.
“There probably was a number but I recognised the face instantly,” the witness said.
Witness “AB” said he was not focused on the numbers the persons on the lineup were wearing and that this all happened two years ago.
“You’re lying, there was no ID parade,” the lawyer said, however the witness maintained that there was an ID parade.
Mrs Farquharson-Seymour suggested that he was quite familiar with these procedures.
“You would’ve been involved in criminal activity since 1996 isn’t that correct?” the lawyer probed.
“I never hurt nobody,” the witness answered.
“Weren’t you convicted of armed robbery? I suggest to you pulling a gun on somebody is hurting them,” the lawyer said.
“Yes, but I’ve never held a gun to a person,” the witness answered.
“You’ve indecently assaulted someone before, correct?” the lawyer said.
“Yes, madam, but I never commit gun violence to anyone,” the court heard.
The witness’ statement to police was put to him and he accepted that he never gave police details of what the women he saw were wearing at the time.
Ingraham’s lawyer also suggested to the witness that his statement contains no mention of an argument.
“At that time I was traumatised and confused. The only thing I regret is going there and picking them up,” the witness answered.
“Had you truly witnessed this incident, you would’ve seen a lone shooter with a hoodie jacket and long blue jeans. No women or any argument,” the lawyer said.
“I don’t recall a hoodie,” the witness answered.
Ingraham, Curry, Edwards and Farrington were charged in November 2013 in connection with the armed robbery and murder of the victim, who is the brother of Democratic National Alliance Leader Branville McCartney.
A fifth person, Terry Delancy, the owner of Virgo Car Rental, was charged with being an accessory after the fact and is on $15,000 bail. All five deny involvement in the killing.
Ian Cargill is representing Delancy while Ingraham, Curry, Edwards and Farrington are respectively represented by Mrs Farquharson-Seymour, Sonia Timothy, Terrel Butler and Philip Hilton.
The trial resumes today before Acting Chief Justice Stephen Isaacs.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.