Accompong election halted by court as police murder trial and Klansman case advance

A Supreme Court judge has blocked nomination and election exercises in the Accompong Maroon community in St. Elizabeth, putting on hold a leadership contest that had been set for next Friday.

Justice Enhart Hines granted an interim injunction on Wednesday after an ex parte application. The order, shared with the media on Thursday, stays nomination day and election day until 10 June 2026 or until a further amended application is filed or heard. A hearing on the amended ex parte notice is fixed for 10 June at 10:00 a.m. for one hour by video conference, or as soon as counsel may be heard. The order requires service on respondent Richard Curry and permits electronic service. Philips, Trail and Company represents claimant Meridate Row, a former colonel and potential candidate in an election that became due on 18 February.

Curry had announced last Saturday that the vote for the next colonel would be held on 22 May, with nominations set for Friday, 15 May—one week before the election. Row is seeking to stop Curry from acting further as colonel and wants an interim maroon council, an election council, a finalized voters’ list, and a bar on Curry calling an election. She alleges Curry planned the process without informing other candidates and imposed rules favouring his agenda, including scheduling nominations before the voters’ list was settled. Row and other potential candidates also dispute a document Curry treats as Accompong’s governing constitution. In a Nationwide News Network interview, Curry said the community has a ratified, gazetted constitution and that the election follows that framework.

In Kingston’s Home Circuit Court on Thursday, a police sergeant told Justice Sonia Bertram-Linton’s court how six officers were arrested and charged in 2019 over the 12 January 2013 shooting deaths of Matthew Lee, Ucliffe Dyer, and Mark Allen. Constable Orandi Rose allegedly declared, “The devil is a liar,” while Sergeant Simro M allegedly said he “may not murder nobody.” Corporals Donovan Fullerton, Andrew Smith, Sheldon Richards, and Richard Lynch made no comment, the witness said. Under cross-examination by defence attorney Hugh Wildman, the sergeant affirmed Rose’s words. Wildman then asked, “Isn’t the devil a liar for true?” prompting a prosecution objection that Justice Bertram-Linton appeared to uphold. The witness said he showed his Jamaica Constabulary Force identification, stated his station, and executed a warrant to charge the men with murder after speaking with his then superior. Fullerton also faced a charge of making a false statement to the Independent Commission of Investigations. The sergeant described collecting three brown envelopes marked P, Q, and R—said to hold spent casings and bullet fragments—from a ballistics expert at the Institute of Forensic Science and Legal Medicine on 4 May and handing them to lead prosecutor Kathy Pike at court that day; envelopes P and Q were opened for viewing, but R was not.

Trial judge Justice Dale Palmer will rule on Monday whether two witnesses may be recalled in the trial of 25 alleged members of the so-called Tesha Miller faction of the Klansman gang. On Thursday he heard further submissions as the prosecution pressed to admit, under section 31D of the Evidence Act, a statement by Chenise Roberts, who died in February 2021. Roberts had given police a statement about the 7 February 2020 killing of Noah Smith at Yardo Place in St. Andrew—conduct linked to counts 15 and 16. Defence counsel argue identification evidence is weak, including dispute over a blurry photograph and whether a detective constable who took the statement could recognize Roberts from the image. A second witness who knew Roberts maintained the photo showed her despite poor quality. Accused Michael Wildman, Jerome Spike, Non Guest, and Giovanni Macdonald face charges of knowingly facilitating that robbery and murder. Senior defence attorney Denise Hinsson urged the court to reject recall, saying it would let the Crown repair damage from cross-examination and breach finality and fairness, noting the court had earlier refused defence recall on a narrow spelling point. The assistant director of public prosecutions argued recall would only establish the link between the statement-giver and the deceased, with safeguards including renewed cross-examination and further admissibility submissions. Justice Palmer indicated he would rule when the matter resumes Monday.