Lawyer: State has no case against Bakr

THE LACK of credibility contained in the evidence of State witnesses Brent “Big Brent” Miller, Brent “Small Brent” Danglade and Sgt Wayne Dick of the Homicide Bureau of Investigations was the foundation of the no-case submission presented by  attorney Pamela Elder yesterday. Elder, who is representing Jamaat Al Muslimeen leader Imam Yasin Abu Bakr, was making her closing submission before Chief Magistrate Sherman McNicolls at the Port-of-Spain Magistrates’ Court. Bakr, 62, was charged on August 21, 2003, with conspiring with others to murder two expelled members of the Jamaat at Citrine Drive in Diego Martin. One of the men, Salim “Small Salim” Rasheed and another man, Adil Ghani, were shot and wounded at the Movie Towne cineplex on June 4, 2003. Ghani’s common-law-wife, Jillia Bowen, was shot dead.

The charge was laid by Cpl Jayson Forde, attached to the Port-of-Spain Homicide Bureau of Investigation. In support of her submission, Elder referred to several judgments regarding the issue of collateral credibility that had been handed down by the House of Lords and the Privy Council. The defence attorney said it was difficult to separate fact from credibility, since the line between both was “a fine one.” The characters of  “the two Bs” (Miller and Danglade), Elder said, were questionable and they were “in a league of their own” in terms of criminal activities and deception. Miller had been charged with the murder of Bowen and had been granted immunity in exchange for evidence against Bakr, Elder said. Danglade, she said, had been committed to stand trial for the murder of Curepe businessman Dennis Persad-Jodhan. Elder said that both men had admitted under cross-examination, to being involved in various types of criminal activities.

Regarding the “current credibility rating” of Sgt Dick, Elder said, it was serious when the integrity of police officers became questionable. She made reference to the judgment given by Madame Justice Paula Mae Weekes on January 15, that several statements given by Dick be excluded from evidence because they were riddled with inconsistencies. Shifting into pastoral gear, the defence attorney likened the prosecution’s case to “that of the foolish man who built his house on the sand” and added that “a prima facie case cannot be built on shifting evidence.” Elder implored the magistrate to “be the judicial wise man” and not attempt to build a prima facie case on evidence that lacked credibility. Although it could be argued that credibility was for a jury to decide, she said, there were some cases in which a magistrate was required to make a decision on the credibility of evidence in order to filter the cases that were sent to the High Court. The quality of evidence was much more important than the quantity, she concluded. Elder will complete her submission on April 2.