Fri | Nov 22, 2024
Keith Clarke Murder Trial

INDECOM investigator’s testimony leads to testy exchanges

Published:Tuesday | October 8, 2024 | 12:10 AMAndre Williams/Staff Reporter
Keith Clarke
Keith Clarke

A forgetful witness, testy exchanges between the defence and Crown, along with partial disclosure allegations led to an early adjournment in the Keith Clarke murder trial on Monday.

Taneisha Wisdom-Banton, former acting director for complaints and investigation at the Independent Commission of Investigations (INDECOM), will resume her testimony today when the matter continues in the Home Circuit Court.

Three Jamaica Defence Force (JDF) soldiers, lance corporals Greg Tingling and Odel Buckley and Private Arnold Henry, are charged with the accountant’s May 27, 2010 murder.

On Monday, the witness was drilling during cross-examination on whether she knew about helicopter footage on the night in question, how many statements she prepared and who assisted and/or gave her directives on how to handle and prepare her findings, among other matters.

Noting the considerable time that has passed since Clarke’s killing, along with the fact that it was her first investigation into a fatal incident for INDECOM, Wisdom-Banton repeatedly responded with “I don’t recall” to questions posed on the stand, eliciting chuckles in the courtroom.

She agreed with the defence that it was after the commencement of the trial that she gave a statement.

“In the course of your investigation, did you come to find out that there was a video, produced by a helicopter that was flying overhead the premises on the day in question?” asked defence attorney Valerie Neita Robertson, who is representing Tingling.

“I don’t recall,” Wisdom-Banton said.

“You didn’t see a letter or any document written to the DPP (director of public prosecutions) indicating that the army had a video of what was transpiring on the ground that day?” Neita Robertson asked.

“I don’t recall a letter ... . No, Ma’am,” Wisdom-Banton said.

“A video of what was happening on the ground would have been very useful and instructive to you as the investigating officer, yes? But you did not know about it?” Neita Robertson asked.

“Yes, ma’am. I don’t recall having that letter,” Wisdom-Banton said.

She went further when pressed to say she took her instruction from former INDECOM Commissioner Terrence Williams. She had earlier told the court that she could not recall when last they spoke.

Dwayne Green – who, along with Senior Deputy Director Of Public Prosecutions Jeremy Taylor, KC and Latoya Bernard, is representing the Crown – objected to the repeated questions about the helicopter video she said she had not seen.

Justice Dale Palmer said nothing was wrong with the questions as the helicopter was used in evidence in the Crown’s case.

The witness was next asked whether she saw the medical reports of the soldiers who were shot on the day.

“No, ma’am,” Wisdom-Banton replied.

“What an investigator! Are you telling me that the officers at the ODPP (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions) did not inform you of that?” Neita Robertson asked.

INVITING HERESY

She was, however, cautioned by Palmer that the questions were inviting hearsay.

Green also requested that Neita Robertson tread carefully so as not to use the word ‘soldiers’ loosely because the injuries mentioned were not related to the accused men before the court.

“I didn’t mention the three [accused]. If I wanted to, I would have,” Neita Robertson said, adding that four soldiers were reportedly shot.

Wisdom-Banton, however, said that if she had knowledge of the gunshot injuries to four soldiers, that would be important to her investigation in terms of the firearms used to inflict the injuries.

“Did you, in the course of your investigation of this matter, receive any information regarding the deceased Mr Clarke’s firearm and whether it was used on the night of the 27th of May 2010?” Neita Robertson asked.

“I don’t recall. The investigation was a long time ago. I don’t recall,” Wisdom-Banton said.

“You don’t recall,” Neita Robertson said, adding that Wisdom-Banton was not being honest, especially about the helicopter.

The Crown objected; however, Palmer said, “It would seem relevant to the proceedings, or at least to the defendant’s case, as to steps she (Wisdom-Banton) did or did not take and why. It seems relevant that she be asked about steps she took in her investigation.”

Wisdom-Banton said INDECOM prepared a report which is put together by its legal department from files she submitted.

She also told the court that her former boss, Williams, gave her instructions on who to interview.

“At the time you were a senior investigating officer for this matter? So who appointed you senior investigator with responsibility for this particular case? And you accepted that appointment?” Neita Robertson asked.

“Yes, at the time, Terrence Williams. That was my role at INDECOM on a whole, for the case,” Wisdom-Banton said.

There was then another round of testy exchanges between Neita Robertson and Taylor.

Palmer intervened and begged the parties not to go down that road.

The cross-examination continued until it hit a crossroads when Wisdom-Banton told the court that she made two statements.

“As a senior investigator, you were not of the view that what you did in this matter was to be disclosed in your statement, everything that you did that is relevant?” Neita Robertson asked.

“Yes, Ma’am,” Wisdom-Banton said.

“Were you advised what your statement should contain?” Neita Robertson asked.

“All advice came from Mr Williams during the investigation,” Wisdom-Banton said.

Neita Robertson reminded Wisdom-Banton that she wrote a statement in July 2024 at the request of the ODPP.

“We do not have any statement from Ms Wisdom in relation to her role as investigator in this matter and I would therefore pause at this stage, My Lord,” Neita Robertson said.

The matter was adjourned and the Crown said it would seek to locate the document and serve.

“My Lord, I can’t speak to what counsel has or does not have in her possession. Our record is that it was disclosed. However, we are willing to research again and serve it back on counsel,” Taylor said.

Buckley is represented by Peter Champagnie, KC, and Henry’s attorney is Linton Gordon.

andre.williams@gleanerjm.com