The Tribune

By NICO SCAVELLA

Tribune Staff Reporter

nscavella@tribunemedia.net

THE lead investigator in former PLP senator Frank Smith’s bribery and extortion trial has admitted to altering the original statement he took from the virtual complainant in the matter by adding in information some two weeks after it was taken and signed.

Superintendent Uel Johnson admitted to inserting an “addendum” in Barbara Hanna’s July 3, 2017 signed statement, and further admitted to subsequently removing the original statement from his file because it would have represented an unnecessary duplication.

“I didn’t alter anything else,” the senior officer said. “I just added that and printed it off. That was my mistake.”

According to the evidence, that “addendum” essentially meant there were two separate statements taken from and signed by Mrs Hanna, and later combined into one document, but when that document was produced before the court on Friday, it only bore one signature.

And the one before the court on Friday was not the original statement Mrs Hanna signed on July 3, 2017 at the Anti-Corruption Unit, as asserted by the defense.

According to Supt Johnson, the first statement was taken on July 3, 2017, while the second one was taken either on and subsequent to July 20 of that year, pursuant to discussions he had with the office of the attorney general. He said he did not know Mrs Hanna prior to that date.

Supt Johnson said he typed up the contents of both statements on a computer as Mrs Hanna relayed the information to him. He said at the time he took the first statement, Mrs Hanna appeared to be “comfortable” and was “forthcoming” with the information she gave.

Supt Johnson said when he took the second statement from Mrs Hanna, he went into her file on the computer and merely added the information to the existing statement. Then, he printed that new statement and had Mrs Hanna sign it.

The defense, led by Keith Knight, QC, questioned the senior officer on his testimony, asserting that the document before the court did not represent the same document that was signed on July 3, 2017.

Meanwhile, Chief Magistrate Joyann Ferguson-Pratt suggested that based on what Supt Johnson said there should have been two signatures on the two-page document before the court—one at the end of the first statement and one at the end of the second.

In response, Supt Johnson insisted that Mrs Hanna signed both statements after they were each taken from her. Concerning the latter statement, however, Supt Johnson explained that when Mrs Hanna was called back to give the additional information, he went into the computer, opened the original document and added the information in.

Then, he printed it off and signed it along with Mrs Hanna. He said he ultimately removed the original July 3, 2017 statement from the file because both that one and the statement with the addendum contained essentially the same information.

Thus, lead Crown attorney Edward Jenkins, QC, submitted that what Supt Johnson should have done was adjust the date to reflect when the “addendum” was made to the first statement so as to avoid the confusion.

Also during Friday’s proceedings, Supt Johnson admitted that his file was incomplete on July 20th when he charged Smith with the criminal offences; however, he maintained that while the file was not complete, there was sufficient evidence to charge Smith with the crimes.

The matter continues on Saturday.

Smith is facing 15 criminal charges concerning his alleged solicitation of $65,000 in bribes from a woman he is said to have assisted in getting a contract. He is currently out on $50,000 bail.

It is alleged that Smith, between April 2016 and April 2017, in respect of his duties as a public officer, demanded and obtained $5,000 a month from Mrs Hanna.

He is also alleged to have attempted to extort another $5,000 from Mrs Hanna.

Concerning the bribery charge, it is alleged he solicited $5,000 a month from Mrs Hanna for aiding her in getting a contract with the PHA.

Smith pleaded not guilty to all of the allegations during his arraignment.