The Tribune

By PAVEL BAILEY

Tribune Staff Reporter

pbailey@tribunemedia.net

THE defence and prosecution offered starkly different accounts of the evidence yesterday as closing arguments were delivered in the murder trial stemming from a fatal car wash shooting on East Street in 2021.

Defence attorney Tamika Roberts argued that the case against Tevin Bethel, 28, was riddled with gaps and investigative failures, while prosecutor Eucal Bonaby told jurors that the victim’s girlfriend had clearly identified the accused as the shooter.

The arguments were made before Justice Guillimina Archer-Minnis in the trial of Bethel, who is accused of shooting and killing Michael Thompson Jr on July 12, 2021.

Ms Roberts told the jury they were the thread that held the criminal justice system together and said the prosecution had failed to produce reliable evidence linking her client to the killing.

She focused heavily on the handling of evidence by police, pointing to testimony by Officer Durell regarding photographs of a blue Nissan March connected to the shooting. She said the officer initially described the images as “irrelevant” before being recalled to testify after Chimika Louis, the victim’s girlfriend, spoke about the vehicle.

Ms Roberts said that when the officer returned to the witness stand, he produced hundreds of photographs of the car.

While acknowledging the trauma Ms Louis experienced, the defence questioned her credibility, noting that she was hysterical during her police interview and had given differing accounts between her statement and her testimony.

Ms Roberts described as a recent fabrication Ms Louis’s claim that the accused first pointed a gun at a group of men before turning it, with trembling hands, toward her and the deceased.

She also highlighted that a chair Ms Louis said she was sitting on at the time of the shooting was never recovered.

The defence maintained that Ms Louis did not witness the shooting and did not know who fired the fatal shots, arguing that the identity of the shooter remained unanswered.

Ms Roberts further criticised the investigation, noting that fingerprint results taken from a suspect vehicle were never produced in court and that a hat recovered from the scene was never tested to link it to her client. She said the hat would not have fit the accused.

She described the police investigation as “slack”, “sloppy” and “sad”.

Ms Roberts also pointed to evidence suggesting that the vehicle photographed and dusted for fingerprints was not the same one used in the shooting, and said investigators acknowledged that the actual vehicle was still unaccounted for.

She challenged the fairness of the identification parade, claiming that people from outside the Criminal Investigation Department were summoned within minutes and were meant to resemble the accused.

Ms Roberts said CCTV footage from two angles was never presented to the court and added that her client cooperated fully with investigators.

She urged the jury to return a verdict of not guilty.

Mr Bonaby, in his closing, said he would lower the emotional temperature of the case. He told the jury that the prosecution had called six witnesses, including a statement from the victim’s father, Michael Thompson Sr.

He maintained that the evidence was sufficient to prove the accused’s guilt and said the jury’s verdict should be grounded in the testimony and exhibits presented.

Mr Bonaby said Ms Louis was an eyewitness who had the courage to testify, adding that she saw the accused approach in broad daylight and later identified him in a photo lineup.

He argued that the absence of the chair did not mean the witness had not been sitting on it, describing the defence’s focus on the chair as a distraction. He said the witness described it as a temporary seat made of wood.

Mr Bonaby also said that fingerprints recovered from a vehicle not used in the shooting would naturally be irrelevant to the accused and reminded the jury that inconsistencies are common in witness testimony.

He urged jurors to assess the evidence carefully and dispassionately and said they would deliver the justice the case deserved.

Cassie Bethel also represented the accused.