Witness: I lied to the court

A MAN who was convicted for killing a broadcaster in 1989, will get another chance to clear his name because a prosecution witness has claimed that he gave false evidence. A date is to be fixed for the hearing of the new appeal after the matter was referred to the Court of Appeal by President George Maxwell Richards. Robert Taylor and Mervyn Parris were charged for the murder of Anthony Gittens on November 9, 1989 at Cocoyea Village, San Fernando. They were found guilty and sentenced to death by Justice Lennox Deyalsingh in the San Fernando Criminal Court on February 17, 1995.

They appealed but the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on February 6, 1999. A petition for leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee was dismissed on December 2, 1999. As was the norm in those days, Taylor and Parris sent petitions to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. But the case was re-opened after Steve Berkeley, the prosecution’s main witness, claimed in a statutory declaration from the Remand Yard at the Port-of-Spain Prison, that he had given false evidence at the trial. He claimed that he was pressured by Senior Supt Mervyn Ghatt, now retired, to give evidence against Taylor. At the trial, Berkeley said he drove Taylor and Parris to the scene of the murder where they got out of the vehicle.

Gunshots were heard and both Taylor and Parris returned and ordered Berkeley to drive away. In the affidavit now, Berkeley stated that he was under pressure by Ghatt to give evidence at the trial. He said this pressure was by means of threats that he would be prosecuted for various serious criminal offences including possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking and receiving stolen goods. Berkeley pointed out if he testified against Taylor and Parris, Ghatt would assist him so he would avoid getting a lengthy prison sentence. In his affidavit, Berkeley denied being with Taylor and Parris when Gittens was killed. Berkeley revealed that ten days before he gave evidence at the San Fernando High Court, he was taken by two policemen to the Mon Repos Police Station where he was kept until he testified.

Taylor’s English solicitors submitted an application to the President of Trinidad and Tobago that the case be referred to the Court of Appeal on the ground that “fresh evidence” had become available. By letter dated February 4, 2005, the President referred the case to the Court of Appeal in accordance with section 64 (a) of the Constitution. They asked that Taylor receive a pardon under section 87 (1) of the Constitution. When the matter was called before Justices Stanley John, Ivor Archie, and Paula Mae Weekes some time ago, no petition for pardon under 87 (1) was received by the court.

Gregory Delzin represented Taylor, while Dana Seetahal and Wayne Rajbansie appeared for the State. There were full submissions dealing with a request for a pardon when no petition was received. Judgment was reserved. The Court of Appeal fixed last Friday for decision. When the matter was called, Justice John expressed concern as to what had happened. There was no petition before the court, but there was one in the original bundle sent to the President. A full day was taken up making submissions to the court. The court will now have to fix a date for the hearing of Taylor’s petition for a pardon.