The Tribune

A POLICEMAN told a jury in a high-profile murder retrial that the “spent casings” of a firearm found outside a nightclub were from either a pistol or a revolver.

Sergeant Keith Rolle, who was the first witness to take the stand in the Constable Jimmy Ambrose murder retrial, said he took a series of photographs of the casings that were scattered about on the ground near Club Rock on March 29, 1999.

After taking pictures of the items with a manual camera, he collected, packaged and sealed the casings.

However, in cross-examination by Romona Farquharson-Seymour, Sgt Rolle agreed that none of his photographs displaying the items could show whether they were the casings being exhibited in court.

What ‘Justice Demands’

Stephen Stubbs, Andrew Davis and Clint Evans each face a charge of murder and attempted murder in connection with the March 1999 death.

Evans is separately charged with two counts of possession of a firearm with intent to put another in fear.

Stubbs is represented by Murrio Ducille and Jerone Roberts while Davis and Evans are represented by Ian Cargill and Romona Farquharson-Seymour respectively.

It is claimed that the three accused, on the day in question, murdered Constable Jimmy Ambrose and attempted to kill Constable Marcian Scott.

It is also alleged that Evans possessed a firearm with intent to put Constables Frank Burrows and Calvin Robinson in fear for their lives.

All three men deny the charges and pleaded not guilty when the charges were read to them on Monday.

In yesterday’s proceedings, the prosecution opened its case with an opening address to the jury, laying out the Crown’s case and the charges being alleged.

“These charges are only allegations and the burden of proving them rests on us,” the prosecution said.

The Crown told the jury that “justice demands innocent people are acquitted and guilty people are found guilty” and they should not be influenced by anything that comes from outside of the courtroom.

The prosecution concluded that the Crown’s evidence to be led would place all three accused at the scene of the crime and prove that they are responsible for the alleged crimes.

“If you feel sure about their guilt, you must convict Stephen Stubbs, Andrew Davis and Clint Evans,” the prosecution said.

Casings Eject from a Revolver or Pistol

Sgt Rolle took the stand after the opening address, recalling the early morning in question when he, while stationed at the Criminal Records Office on Thompson Blvd, received a call and was given information.

“Sometime after 2am, while on duty, I went to the Club Rock establishment. At the time it was situated on West Bay Street, west of the Hilton hotel,” Sgt Rolle said.

The officer said he spoke with Sgt Henzie who gave him additional information and instructions to photograph and collect items in an area pointed out to him.

“I observed on this scene in a field, one spent casing near the western wall,” the officer said.

“What type of gun would eject a spent casing?” the prosecution asked.

“A spent casing would eject from a revolver or pistol,” the policeman answered.

Sgt Rolle said he found two more spent casings not far from the wall and a fourth casing “further down from the entrance gate for the establishment.”

He then found two additional casings on the floor near the entrance to the club. He photographed the items before collecting, packaging and sealing them in envelopes that he marked.

Sometime later that morning, he went to the Princess Margaret Hospital and spoke with a physician who handed him a plastic container with a bullet projectile inside.

Rolle said he also collected a jacket and “Paco” blue jeans that he packaged and sealed. The policeman said he then went to the police forensics lab to hand over the exhibits to Cpl Smith. The exhibits were labled KR1-9.

Rolle returned to the criminal records office where a film was developed from the nine photos he had taken. There were 21 negatives in total as he locked these items away in his locker.

The following day, March 30, Sgt Rolle went to the Rand laboratory to see the body of Jimmy Ambrose, who he said he had known for six to seven years.

He took three photos of Ambrose to complete his part in the investigation.

Time of Day Disputed

Rolle was cross-examined first by Mr Ducille. The attorney asked Rolle if he agreed that the time he took the photos, it would’ve been dark.

“I agree,” the policeman answered.

Mr Ducille asked the officer to look at the top of the first photograph.

“I suggest this photo wasn’t taken in the dark at all,” the attorney said. Rolle disagreed with the suggestion.

Mr Ducille asked the officer how far away he was from the building when he took the photos and the officer answered “15 feet.”

“Why is photography no.4 darker than no.1 and 6 when it’s the same camera and its dark?” the lawyer then asked.

Rolle answered that he was not an expert, but explained the amount of light entering the lens of the camera would affect how the photograph would turn out.

“My suggestion is you took photographs no.1 and 6 when it was daylight,” Mr Ducille said.

“No sir,” Sgt Rolle answered.

The Report Says...
Sgt Rolle was then cross-examined by Ian Cargill. Mr Cargill recalled the officer’s evidence about knowing the deceased.

“Did you do a report in this matter?” Davis’ attorney asked.

“I did,” Sgt Rolle answered.

Mr Cargill suggested that in his previous testimony in Magistrates Court, his evidence was that a pathologist identified the deceased to him as Jimmy Ambrose. Rolle disagreed before his report in the matter was put to him to read over.

“In your report, you make no mention that you knew him,” the attorney suggested.

“Correct,” Rolle said.

Casings Unable to be ID’d
Romona Farquharson Seymour was the last to question Sgt Rolle.

She asked him if any police cars and civilians were present when he arrived on the scene an hour after receiving the call.

“No,” Rolle answered.

“But the police sergeant gave you information and pointed out the scene?” the attorney asked.

“Correct,” the officer answered.

“You would accept that there would not have been any lights on when you took photos of the building?” the attorney asked.

“I don’t remember any lights being on,” Rolle said.

“Would it be correct to say you saw no yellow tape showing a crime scene?” Farquharson-Seymour asked.

“I don’t remember seeing a yellow tape,” the officer answered.

The lawyer then asked the officer if it would’ve been proper procedure to label the items on the scene with cones or markings. However, Sgt Rolle said “they are as I found them on the scene.”

“I’m going to suggest that we are not able to tell which of these (casings) would be KR1-6” the attorney said.

“Not looking at the photographs, no,” the policeman answered.

Mrs Farquharson-Seymour then suggested to Sgt Rolle that had he done his job properly that morning, the court and jury would be able to connect the casings in the photos with the casings being exhibited in court.

“I disagree,” Sgt Rolle answered.

The trial resumes today before Justice Roy Jones.