Unusual circumstances surround forensic analysis in Keith Clarke murder trial

A former government forensic analyst on Monday admitted that it was “very unusual” for her to have been asked to visit Keith Clarke’s murder scene five months after he was fatally shot.

The witness, who had served in the post for 33 years and had covered more than 100 murder scenes, further shared under cross-examination that it was the first time in her career that she was asked to carry out an investigation and assessment at a scene so late.

She further testified that had she visited the scene on the day of the murder or a day after, she would have been able to provide a more comprehensive and accurate analysis.

Additionally, the forensic analyst said she was never told whether the scene was protected, and she agreed that the possibility of it being contaminated would have been very high by then.

The expert witness was testifying in the Home Circuit Court, where Lance corporals Greg Tingling and Odel Buckley, as well as Private Arnold Henry, are on trial for Clarke’s murder before Justice Dale Palmer.

The 63-year-old businessman was shot 21 times at his Kirkland Close, St Andrew home, on May 27, 2010, during a police-military operation to apprehend then-fugitive drug lord Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke, and it was not until October, that the witness was instructed to visit the scene.

King’s Counsels Valerie Neita-Robertson and Peter Champagnie both questioned the witness about unusual occurrences, including the fact that she was asked to give her opinion on three propositions about the position Clarke was in when he was killed.

GIVEN POSSIBILITIES

Earlier in her evidence-in-chief, she testified that the Independent Commission of Investigations gave her three possible scenarios as to Clarke’s position when he was shot, but only one was likely.

She said she was inclined to refute the idea that he was shot while lying on top of the closet as there was no blood stain observed atop it. Furthermore, she said there was also no evidence to suggest that he was shot again when he fell to the floor.

But the witness told the court that it was more probable that Clarke was shot while climbing down from the closet.

Additionally, she said that the blood spatter on some pieces of clothing inside the closet and the eastern back wall of the closet suggest that Clarke could have been injured while in an upright position.

However, while being questioned by Neita-Robertson, who is representing Tingling, the witness admitted that it was equally unusual for her to have been given scenarios and to provide an opinion.

“I don’t recall having this proposition put to me in my tenure,” she said.

When similarly questioned by Champagnie, she said it was the first in her career that she was being called on to give her opinion on the propositions and to visit a murder scene five months after the incident.

She said normally, as an expert, she would have been required to examine the scene without anyone giving her any theories.

Asked by Neita- Robertson, if she was aware of the basis for the propositions, the witness said they probably resulted from what was in the media.

At the same time, the witness during re-examination by the Crown, said the proposition did not affect her ability to come up with an independent finding.

FAMILY TESTIMONY

Clarke’s widow and daughter previously testified that they witnessed Clarke being shot while climbing down from the closet with his back turned to the soldiers. Clarke’s daughter, Brittany, had insisted that he was shot at the window while coming down.

But during questions from Champagnie, the expert witness ruled out the idea that the witness was shot at the window. She said she never saw any blood spatter on the window or the walls around the window. She could recall that she had seen a curtain and whether it had blood marks, but was certain there was no bloodstain or spatter on the window.

She was also questioned about the blood stain that was seen in the dining room and washroom area of the second floor and indicated that a test done on the mark seen in the washroom confirmed that it was human blood.

According to her, the source of blood could have been from someone bleeding or from blood-soaked clothing, but she said the test done was only to confirm whether the substance was blood.

At the same time, when asked about the findings of the test done on the blood sample taken from the master bedroom, she said it could not confirm who one of the profiles belonged to and that the sample taken from the deceased was inconclusive.

The trial will continue today.

tanesha.mundle@gleanerjm.com