The fifth accused in the robbery of Justice Nicola Pierre and her husband Mohammed Chan has also claimed that he was at home on the night of the robbery, though his father clammed up in the middle of being cross-examined as an alibi witness.
Warren McKenzie led his defence by giving unsworn testimony yesterday, in which he told the court that he was at home on both July 8 and 9 and was later granted time to produce another witness after his father went inexplicably silent.
McKenzie is on trial alongside Daymeion Millington, Nicholas Narine, Premnauth Samaroo and Anthony David on charges that they robbed Justice Pierre and her husband of cash and articles amounting to over $3.6 million, as well as shot at security guard Ron Peters on July 9, 2015.
McKenzie told the court that he left his home on July 13 to attend a birthday party in Craig, East Bank Demerara. He said he stayed in Craig that night because he was too drunk to go home. The next day, McKenzie said, he was awakened by gun shots from the police. “They were shooting the house we went in and then they kick down the door,” McKenzie said. He said he was injured by a bullet and the next thing he remembered was waking up in the hospital.
McKenzie said while he was in the hospital an officer went to him and told him that he was being held for committing a felony on the East Coast Demerara and a gun and ammunition charge. He said that two days after that conversation, the same officer returned and informed him that he had to go to court for robbing a Ms Pierre and her husband.
“I do not know a Pierre,” McKenzie said he told the officer.
According to McKenzie the officer replied “I don’t want to hear that! You have to go to court.” McKenzie said he was taken to court and he and the four other accused were charged with the robbery of the judge.
Taking the stand to testify on the accused’s behalf was his father Ivelaw McKenzie, who corroborated his son’s testimony, telling the court that his son was at home the night the judge was robbed.
Under cross-examination by special prosecutor Nigel Hughes, Ivelaw told the court that he only knew his son was being charged with the robbery when he appeared in court to answer the charge. He later told the court that he knew for sure his son was charged with the robbery when he received statements from the police two weeks after his son went to court. Hughes asked if he knew that his son was at home and innocent of the crime, why he hadn’t told the police or someone that his son was innocent? Ivelaw replied that he made attempts but was turned away by the security at the Brickdam Police Station. He said he knew for sure that his son was at home.
Further into the cross-examination, the father of the accused stopped responding to Hughes’ questioning, which caused Magistrate Zamilla Ally-Seepaul to question his state of mind in testifying in the matter.
Hughes asked whether he understood the questions that were being asked or if he was avoiding answering them. The special prosecutor later ended his cross-examination.
The magistrate granted more time for McKenzie to produce another witness for his defence.
The trial continues on May 23.
