Philipsburg:--- The three defense lawyers representing the three suspects that are involved in the murder of US citizens Michael and Thelma King poked several holes in the case presented by the Prosecution on Tuesday against the three suspects, Meyshane Kemar Johnson, Jeremiah Chevon Mills, and Jamal Jefferson Woolford. Even though all three of the lawyers that are representing the suspects are from different law firms, they all had the same view on the case presented by the prosecution. All of the lawyers stated in their pleadings that the prosecution did not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt for the types of sentences they are asking for the suspects.
The second day of proceedings began with Attorney at Law Brenda Brooks who is representing the main suspect in the brutal slaying of the Kings.
Brooks is representing Meyshane Kemar Johnson who admitted to slashing the throats of both victims. In presenting her defense, Brooks called on the court to look at what transpired during the pro-forma hearing and she pointed out the amount of mistakes that were made by the prosecution. Attorney Brooks made sure she informed the court that despite the outcome of the case, she intends to appeal the decision because of the mistakes made by the prosecution and more seriously because they concealed that information and did not submit it to the court and the defense. She said based on the mistakes made the judge should deem the case inadmissible. "The prosecution considers this case to be of a serious nature and I agree with them because two people lost their lives, however, I cannot see how the prosecution would intentionally make so many mistakes and then try to cover it up by concealing it from the court and the defense. Your honor I want to make clear that every place in the world has procedures that have to be followed and that also applies to the United States, where the victims are from. Our law gives us the opportunity to correct mistakes that we make but instead of using the time the prosecution had to correct their mistakes they made more mistakes when issuing two summons to the main suspect on January 17th, 2013. The mistakes made by the prosecution can be fatal to this case in the long run because I will go to the highest court to show what takes place here on St Maarten. I want to know how you would feel your honor that we go through the legal system and this case is thrown out because of the mistakes made by the prosecution. Therefore, from now I am asking you to deem the case inadmissible." Brooks said she only found out about the second summons when she spoke to the prison guard that delivered the third summons to Johnson and she is the one who informed the court of that second summons. "This is not acceptable, all of us in here studied the same law and we need to follow procedures. I can only conclude that the prosecution did sloppy work, this is even beyond sloppy work." The Prosecution, she said served her client with three summons, one on January 7th, 2013 to appear in Court on January 10th, 2013, just three days prior to the hearing. She told the court that her client refused to waive his rights on the seven (eight) days notification period, therefore he did not attend the trial on January 10th, 2013. That led the judge (Judge Tyghuis) to deem the summons null and void but the judge did not release Johnson. Brooks went on to explain that she appealed that decision and the Appeals Court upheld the decision given by judge of the Court of First Instance but they did not rule on the other two summons that were issued to her client on January 17th, 2013 because that is not yet before them. Brooks used several case laws from Curacao and the Netherlands to prove to the court that because of the same mistakes the higher court had to release suspects who committed worse crimes than the three suspects that were in court on Tuesday.
Another point Brooks raised before dealing with the six charges her client is facing is the way her client was arrested on September 23rd, 2012. Brooks said when Johnson was arrested the Police Arrest Team used excessive force which amounts to police brutality. She said Johnson had to be taken to the hospital where he received treatment such as stitches in his head. Brooks provided the court with photographs of the injuries Johnson sustained, she said that the police knows when they brutalize suspects they end up being released by judge of instruction because the law does not condone police brutality. Attorney Brooks said that the A Team consisted of several men and it was not necessary for them to use excessive force to arrest one man who was hiding under a bed. "In St. Maarten we do not condone crimes that are committed against our visitors and locals, neither do we condone police brutality. The police's behavior will have consequences on the decision when it is taken." She asked the court to consider the amount of force used by the police when judge is rendering her verdict on the case on May 8th, 2013.
As for the first charge, the prosecutor charged Johnson as one of the suspects and perpetrators of the armed robbery at the Happy Star Chinese restaurant. She asked the judge to acquit her client of that charge because Johnson did not participate in that robbery. "My client drove the car, which he admitted to but he did not commit the robbery at Happy Star. Brooks referred to a case that the Appeals Court overturned recently when the driver of a getaway car was convicted for a robbery two other persons committed." She said the owner of Happy Star Chinese Restaurant knows Johnson because he was a regular client of the restaurant. "Johnson was still in his uniform and he did not have a mask or anything to commit the robbery."
Brooks then moved to the fourth and fifth charge which is the murder/ manslaughter of Michael and Thelma King. She asked the court to acquit Johnson on the murder charge because the prosecution did not provide evidence and they did not prove their case beyond reasonable doubt to show that Johnson had committed pre-mediated murder when he killed Michael and Thelma King. "My client confessed to killing the Kings and he gave several statements some of which has details of what transpired that night. The court also has the psychiatric report on Johnson who was institutionalized twice for psychotic and delusional behavior. Apart from that Brooks told the court that Johnson does not remember anything that happened that night because of his condition and he was also intoxicated. "This is not only frustrating for the court but it is also frustrating for me because I cannot get the information and details I need from him. You heard him yesterday telling this court that he does not remember anything. This is no fairy tale, the psychiatric report has the information in it." Attorney Brooks said that the case that is before the court amounts to manslaughter, therefore she asked the court to convict Johnson for manslaughter for the killing both Michael and Thelma King. She said the suspects gave the police statements and they all told the police and this court that they did not have a plan to rob or kill people on the night of September 19th, 2012. The prosecution has the responsibility to prove that the suspects had a plan to rob and murder the Kings and all three of the suspects said there was no plan they just chose the King's house randomly. Brooks told the court that she is convinced that something is wrong and therefore the court should convict Johnson on the manslaughter charge. Attorney Brooks did not contest the sixth charge which is the laundering of money and goods because she considered that the charge has been sufficiently proven by the prosecution. Brooks also pleaded with the court to grant her client reduced punishment for his actions because he is a first time offender. She said her client has children in his country and while people are saying that there is no lifetime sentence within the Dutch law she said that lifetime is lifetime and nothing less.
The second Attorney that presented her defense on Wednesday was Attorney at Law Shaira Bommel on behalf of Jeremiah Chevon Mills. Bommel presented her defense in the Dutch language because she said she was only going to deal with the technical aspect of the case. Bommel said that while her client is facing six charges, some of them he confessed to and the others he did not confess to them simply because he did not commit those crimes. She told the court that her client Jeremiah Chevon Mills gave more than one statement to the police and she urged the court to consider those statements to be truthful. As for the first charge which is the robbery that was committed at Happy Star Chinese Restaurant, Mills confessed to it so I will not contest that charge.
However, the robbery and killing of the Kings in Cupe Coy is a different story according to Bommel and Mills. Bommel said the prosecution wants the court to believe that her client was an accomplice or accessory to the killing of Michael and Thelma King. However, they did not prove that in this courtroom beyond a reasonable doubt. The law clearly states that to be considered an accomplice of a crime there has to be a plan, the prosecution must show pre-meditation and they also has to show that Mills actually assisted with the killing of the Kings. "I don't see anything in the file the prosecution presented to you that showed Mills actually assisted or participated in the killings. We also have the statements from all of the suspects, as for the man who actually killed the Kings he cannot remember anything that happened that night. What I deduced from the file is both Mills and Woolford were taken by surprise when they learnt that the Kings were murdered. They were shocked when they heard of this via the newspapers. I see no correlation in the file and therefore I have to say that Mills were not involved in the Kings slayings." Bommel said her client did not even see Johnson was in possession of a knife (weapon). Therefore, she pleaded with the court to acquit Mills on the charge of being an accomplice or accessory to the murders of the Kings. He did commit a robbery at the Kings' home and he did not use any violence against them, therefore I am asking this court to punish him for the crimes he committed and those that were proven by the prosecution. Bommel said that the prosecution is trying to send three people to jail based on guess work and not evidence. There is nothing in the file that shows a second knife was used. Mills and Woolford gave statements to the police separately and their stories are the same, they went to the Kings house to commit a robbery, there was no intention to kill or harm anyone. Bommel further told the court that the prosecution told this court that Johnson stayed seven (7) minutes in the house alone because the two other suspects, Mills and Woolford had already left the scene. "Your honor a lot could have happened in (7) minutes while Johnson was alone in the house. Mills and Woolford left with what they came for, monies and valuable items. They did not envision that Johnson would have killed an innocent woman who was bound to a chair, gagged and blindfolded." Bommel said because of the lack of evidence she is pleading with the court to acquit her client on the charges that are levied against him as an accomplice or accessory to the brutal killing of the Kings. Bommel said her client had stolen from the Kings and he also helped in tying Thelma King to a chair therefore he should be punished for that, she further explained that Mills and Woolford promised Thelma King that they would not hurt or harm her and when they went upstairs to get the monies and the grey bag from the safe. They did not use any violence towards her and they did not hurt her. "Even when they asked Thelma King to sit in the chair so they could tie, gag, and blind fold her they did not use violence, because none of that is in the file that is before this court. The file does not even show that the robbery committed that night at the Kings home would have left two people dead. Attorney Bommel said even though the death of the Kings are tragic to say the least, the blame cannot be thrown on Mills because he did not do it, therefore she pleaded with the court to acquit Mills on the charges relating to the death of the Kings but hold him accountable for the robbery and unlawful restraint of Thelma King. Bommel further explained that Mills fully cooperated with the investigation and what he told law enforcement is exactly the role he played that night.
Attorney at Law Safira Ibrahim also tried to convince the court that her client Jamal Jefferson Woolford was not an accessory or accomplice to the killing of the Kings. Attorney Ibrahim told the court that Woolford stayed where he lived in Cay Hill most of the day on September 19th, 2012. However, he had financial difficulties because he could not pay his rent and support his pregnant girlfriend who is due to give birth next month. Ibrahim said that Woolford was working for Island Charters located at Bobby's Marina and the slow tourist season had affected his income therefore he could not pay his bills. She said Woolford began working since he was 12 years old. As for the robbery that was committed on the night of September 19th, 2012 at Happy Star Chinese Restaurant, Ibrahim asked the court to acquit her client on one part of the charge because the prosecution claimed that Woolford held a pellet gun at the head of one of the clients in the restaurant and while the prosecution spoke about the statement given by the owner of Happy Star who said she heard when Woolford cranked the gun, the client who had the gun to his head did not say that. Another argument Ibrahim used was based on how the owner of Happy Star was positioned she could not have seen or heard if a gun was cranked. Besides that, she told the court that the pellet gun was not loaded and it was not cranked. She asked the court to convict Woolford on the robbery, she also pleaded with the court to take Woolford's financial standing into consideration, the fact that he is a first time offender, and to look at his academic achievements. Ibrahim said Woolford has several diplomas and he worked hard for his living, besides all of those facts, he gave the investigators his full cooperation during the investigation.
As for the killing of Michael and Thelma King, Ibrahim said it is funny how the prosecutor used the statement Woolford made to the investigators when he saw Johnson made a sudden move to slash Michael King's throat and he said he told Johnson not to do it. Ibrahim said that Woolford was standing by the sliding door, he wanted to leave, he got what he went there for, and when he saw the sudden movement by Johnson who was holding Micheal King in a headlock with a knife to this throat he yelled out at Johnson and told him not to do that. Apart from that, Woolford then left the home with the monies, iPhone, and laptop. "When my client left that house both Michael and Thelma King were alive. The prosecution used his statement against Johnson and then they turned around and used it against him saying he did not do anything to try and stop Johnson from killing Michael and Thelma King." Ibrahim insisted that Woolford was not in close proximity of Johnson and the only reason he assisted in tying up Thelma King was because he wanted to make sure they got away safely. Ibrahim told the court that the statements the suspects gave police are consistent when they said they did not plan to kill anyone and they did not know the Kings. She said the Kings house was chosen randomly while the three suspects were walking along the beach. "The Kings home had on light and the sliding door was open, my client had no intention to hurt or kill anyone. When the suspects entered the house, Johnson went and held Michael King by headlock he held a knife to his throat while Woolford and Mills went upstairs in search of monies. When Woolford, Mills, and Thelma King came downstairs Micheal King was still alive, Woolford and Mills had no idea that Johnson would have killed the victims, he was alone with Micheal King and he did not do it then. Ibrahim asked the court to acquit her client on the accessory charge to the murder/manslaughter of the Kings and to hold him accountable for the robbery and illegal restraining of Thelma King.
After the lawyers presented their defense, Prosecutor Dounia Benammar admitted to the court that they made mistakes and she apologized for the mistakes they made. However, Benammar said the law allows them to issue as much as 20 summons if they want, especially if a suspect is living several places. She said that it is absurd for Attorney Brooks to ask the court to deem the case inadmissible because of their mistakes and the police brutality. In no time Attorney Brooks responded in her rebuttal and asked the Prosecutors if they read her pleadings because she did not ask the court to deem the case inadmissible because of the police brutality. She said she asked the court to consider the police brutality when it is making its decisions. Brooks also told the court that the prosecution should not mislead the court or the public when they said that the first lifetime sentences were handed down in the Regatta cases which were eventually overturned. Brooks said there is a prisoner right now in Pointe Blanche Prison serving a lifetime sentence for the murder of Bobby Velasquez's daughter. Brooks said this sentence was handed down when she was just a child and the last time she saw that convict was on Monday when she visited the house of detention.
Meyshane Kemar Johnson in his address to the court said that he is being charged with a crime he committed and cannot remember. He said that he has been working and assisting in the prison facilities because he cannot see himself sitting in prison for lifetime. Johnson then went on and apologized to the King families. He said he hopes that the Kings could forgive him and he can come to the point of forgiving himself for his deeds. "I just don't know if I can live with myself with what I have done to those people."
Jeremiah Chevon Mills in his statement said that he wants to apologize for his actions but he does not know if the Kings will accept his apology. "I will still ask you for your forgiveness, if I could go back in time and undo what I did on September 19th, 2012 I would have done so and stop Johnson from killing your loved ones. I rob people, use drugs but I will never physically hurt anyone. I understand how you are feeling and I am sorry I ever went to the Kings' home. I hope you will accept my apology."
Jamal Jefferson Woolford also apologized to the King families he said had no intention to hurt anyone. "All I am asking for is a second chance so that I can make good with my life."
The judge Tamara Tyghuis said because of the upcoming Carnival holidays and the Queen's Birthday at the end of April she cannot close the criminal proceedings on Wednesday because then she would have to render her decision three weeks later and during that period the court will be closed due to the holidays. Judge Tyghuis said that she will resume the case on May 8th, 2013 where she will officially close case and shortly after that she will render her decision.