Thu | Mar 28, 2024

Verdict in Uchence gang trial delayed until March

Published:Thursday | December 12, 2019 | 12:21 AM

The verdicT in the case against alleged gang leader Uchence Wilson and his 17 accused has been pushed back to March 30, 2020.

In a letter addressed to attorneys in the matter, dated December 6, Chief Justice Bryan Sykes indicated that due to problems with the previous software used to collate, analyse and annotate evidence, an alternative had to be sought.

The procurement for the new software, according to letter, was not completed until last week. The verdict was previously set for January 8, 2020.

“Unfortunately, the procurement process was not complete until December 4, 2019, when the link to the software was acquired. This new software seems more promising, but there is an inevitable learning curve which was to be successfully negotiated. The transcripts and other evidence will now have to be loaded on to this software, annotated and managed,” Sykes said.

He expressed apologies for the delay, citing that it could not be avoided.

THE TRIAL

During the trial, which began on March 4, a total of 37 witnesses testified.

Sixty-one items were entered into evidence, including a witness statement from accused Michael ‘Judge’ Lamonth, pawnshop contracts, cell phone data, car rental contracts, a rifle, a ballistics report, and cell phones seized from alleged gang members.

Wilson’s passport, which placed him outside of the country when he was said to have participated in one of the alleged robberies, was also admitted into evidence.

The prosecution is relying on accomplice evidence of two witnesses who claim to have been members of the gang.

In their respective testimonies, the two confessed members of the gang told the court that they participated in robberies in St Andrew, St Catherine, Clarendon, St Ann, Trelawny, and St Mary.

They told the court that the criminal organisation would trade in stolen items, particularly electronics, at a pawnshop in the Corporate Area.

In no-case submissions made in July on behalf of the accused, excluding Lamonth, defence attorneys argued that the prosecution had not proven their clients’ involvement in the gang beyond a reasonable doubt.

However, Sykes ruled that only Junior Rose and Shadday Beckford had no case to answer because the prosecution offered no evidence against them.