Constable rejects defence claim that Kevin Green identification was staged in Klansman trial

Defence attorneys failed Thursday to persuade a police constable that his identification of a murder victim from a 2017 Ripon Road shooting had been arranged in advance, as the officer returned to the witness box in the long-running trial of 25 men said to belong to the Tesha Miller wing of the Klansman gang.

The officer was giving further testimony about what he did on the night of August 14, 2017, when cab driver Kevin Green was killed and a second man was shot in the shoulder during an attack tied to the gang. His account relates to counts five and six on the indictment, which accuse Tesha Miller, Rolando Jermaine Hall and Michael Wildman of Green's murder and of wounding the other victim with intent.

In earlier evidence, the constable said he pulled Green from the Toyota Probox the driver had been operating when he came under fire, then took the fatally injured man to Kingston Public Hospital. He also drove the wounded survivor from the same incident.

During that earlier session, prosecutors showed him a printed photograph and asked whether it depicted the person he had transported. He told the court he could not say with certainty that it did.

On Thursday, after he had already reviewed several images from the scene, prosecutors displayed a virtual photograph of an individual and asked him to name the person shown. Defence counsel objected strongly.

Attorney Denise Hinson argued that allowing a second identification attempt was unfair, given that the witness had been unable to recognise Green from the first picture. "For him to be given a second opportunity is manifestly unfair," Hinson stated.

The assistant deputy director of public prosecutions who was leading the questioning maintained the procedure was "perfectly permissible." He noted that Hinson herself had on the first occasion questioned the "quality" and "provenance" of the original image.

Trial judge Justice Dale Palmer sided with the prosecution. The constable then asked for the image on the screen to be rotated before saying, "It resembles Kevin Green that I escorted to the Kingston Public Hospital the night of the incident, [who] was pronounced dead."

Under further cross-examination, Hinson pressed the officer on how he could tell one deceased person from another, noting that he had encountered many bodies in the course of duty and that nearly nine years had passed since the shooting.

"Do you agree that there is nothing unique about the features of the person you identified as Kevin Green?" she asked.

"Seeing the photos I could recognise him," the officer replied, adding that he still recalled the man's appearance despite the time that had elapsed.

Hinson then put it to him that he had been prepared in advance to name Green from whatever photograph was shown. The constable denied that suggestion, explaining that he could identify Green on Thursday because the earlier image had been in black and white.

The lawyer also challenged the reliability of his memory after he conceded he did not recall the injured man's features "clearly," even though he had transported that person alongside Green.

The constable said his contact with the wounded man was brief, whereas he spent longer with the deceased victim in the cordoned area at the scene and with medical staff as they sought to "ascertain information about him."

"I am suggesting to you that your recognition of the image is because you knew you were going to be shown an image of someone who is purported to be the deceased Kevin Green," Hinson told him.

"Your suggestion is wrong," the constable replied.

When Hinson said he had been truthful the first time because he could not recognise the person in the printed photo, he answered, "I am honest all the time."

Defence attorney Paul Gentles later took up the cross-examination, focusing on the officer's use of the phrase "It resembles Kevin Green" to argue that the identification was not firm.

"It is him," the constable said, and several questions later added, "It is the person."

Gentles asked whether he had spoken with the prosecution or anyone else before returning to court. The officer answered, "No."

"I am going to suggest to you that you were well-briefed as to why you are coming here this morning," Gentles said.

"Your suggestion is wrong," the constable replied.

Gentles went further, putting it to the witness that his only reason for appearing was to label any photograph shown as Kevin Green, and later described him as a "witness of the highest dishonesty."

"I had no knowledge," the officer said in response.

Last month, a detective sergeant who led the investigation into the shooting just outside the Palais Royal guest house testified for the first time and connected the body removed from the scene with the remains held at the morgue.

Both the constable and a forensic scene-of-crime investigator had previously told the court they could not determine the dead man's identity.

The detective said that when he visited the morgue he carried "a Jamaican driver's licence with a photograph and the name Kevin Omar Green," which the first-responding constable had given him at the murder scene. From that document he confirmed who the deceased was.

He also said he attended Green's post-mortem in September 2017, where he presented the person who would identify the body to the doctor conducting the examination. After the post-mortem, he obtained a statement from that individual.

Proceedings are set to continue on Monday at the Home Circuit Division of the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston.