The Tribune

By Denise Maycock

Tribune Freeport Reporter

dmaycock@tribunemedia.net

DNA from none of the five co-defendants was found at the murder scene in Deadman’s Reef, the Supreme Court heard on Tuesday as a defence counsel continued his questioning of a lead police investigator in the case.

According to a Police forensic report, police had taken 100 swabbed samples at the residence of Barry and Sheena Johnson following the couple’s murder on September 12, 2015.

Four armed masked men wearing long-sleeved shirts, hats, and pants were seen on surveillance footage at the Johnsons’ residence on the night in question. They were robbed of a set of keys and their GMC truck.

On trial for the murders and armed robbery are Paul Belizaire, Devaughn Hall, and Kevin Dames.

Geoffrey Farquharson, counsel for Paul Belizaire, questioned Det Sgt 772 Lorenzo Johnson about whether the samples taken at the murder scene were compared with DNA samples taken from other possible suspects who were initially questioned in connection with the matter.

“If you fail to send a DNA sample of a suspect for comparison, the samples found at the crime scene would come up as unknown?” asked counsel.

Det Johnson agreed. “They (persons in police forensic lab) would not be able to match it,” he explained.

“Were you made aware that of all 100 samples taken that Belizaire’s DNA was not found anywhere on the crime scene?” asked Mr Farquharson.

Det Johnson replied that he was not aware of that, and had indicated that today was the first time he had even seen the forensic report in court.

Mr Farquharson then put it to the witness that none of the other defendants’ DNA was found on the scene.

Referring to one of the sampled items – a T-shirt that was found by police and said to have been worn by one of the suspects on the scene – the lawyer said that client’s DNA was also not found on the T-shirt.

Although Det Johnson agreed that police found a T-shirt believed to be worn by one of the suspects at the scene, he said he did not know of any DNA found on the t-shirt. “It did not seem suspicious that a T-shirt that was worn by a suspect at a crime scene and who after trekking through bushes, did not have any of the suspect’s DNA on it?”

The witness said he did not know.

Mr Farquharson asked Det Johnson if he knew that DNA is contained in sweat, and the witness said he had heard that.

“I put it to you by them not giving you the forensic report … you failed to gather important evidence as to who really committed the crime,” Mr Farquharson suggested.

Det Johnson explained that DNA results go directly to the Office of the Attorney General. “I am seeing this report about the DNA for the first time,” he said.

Mr Farquharson then accused the detective of jumping to conclusions on or about September 15, 2015, about who committed murders. “You knew who the perpetrators are, and you allowed the informants, snitches, and rats to ‘swing you,’ “ suggested counsel.

The detective told the court that nobody was able to ‘swing him.’ He said that his client, Paul Belizaire, had told him he and others were at the murder scene and what part each had played on the night in question.

“He (Belizaire) admitted what he and others did,” said the witness, who indicated that he charged the defendant in addition to other information and evidence he had gathered in the case.

When Mr Farquharson insisted that his client did not shoot or rob anyone, Det Johnson replied that Belizaire was in the victim’s truck.

The lawyer then questioned the witness about two other suspects - Dian Dean and Samiko Rigby - who were also initially questioned on the matter, but not charged.

“They said they did not do it and you believed them because you did not charge them?” Mr Farquharson asked.

After making checks, Det Johnson said he did not charge them.

He told the court that he charged Allan Alcime and Virgil Hall, two of the co-defendants.

Mr Farquharson asked the detective if during his investigation whether Alcime and Virgil Hall had admitted to committing the murders and armed robbery.

Det Johnson said that the pair had pleaded guilty to the armed robbery and are serving time. Mr Farquharson quickly interjected, noting that the two men had pleaded not guilty to the offences in the Magistrate’s Court, and had only entered a guilty plea to the armed robbery a year later when they were offered a plea deal.

Mr Farquharson, who referred to the two men as “rats,” suggested that both Alcime and Virgil Hall are lairs. Det Johnson said both co-defendants had admitted to him what they did on the night in question.

Mr Farquharson accused Det Johnson of beating his client and Devaughn Hall to obtain a police statement from them.

The witness denied that the two defendants were beaten. He said that at no time did the men complain of being beaten to any of the other officers they would have come in contact with while they were in custody.

“They had the opportunity to say something happened to them and they did not say anything was wrong,” said Det Johnson.

The trial continues on Wednesday.