Hinds continues testimony against Beetham man

Date: 
Monday, January 13, 2020 - 17:15

Laven­tille West MP Fitzger­ald Hinds re­turned to the wit­ness stand briefly as the ob­scene lan­guage case of self-pro­claimed Beetham Com­mu­ni­ty Ac­tivist An­der­son Wil­son con­tin­ued yes­ter­day.

Hinds’stay in the wit­ness box, how­ev­er, was cut short as he had to ex­it the pro­ceed­ings at 11. 45 am to at­tend an im­por­tant meet­ing at White­hall, the court learnt.

The mat­ter it­self had a de­layed start as de­fence at­tor­ney Dar­ren Mitchell said he could not ar­rive be­fore 11 am.

The de­lays in the case ap­peared most ir­ri­tat­ing to Wil­son, who is ac­cused of us­ing ob­scene lan­guage to­wards the MP, as he told the court he had missed pass­port ap­point­ments to at­tend the case.

Wil­son ap­peared rest­less dur­ing the mat­ter, and would con­stant­ly ges­ture or make ut­ter­ances which would re­peat­ed­ly draw warn­ings from Mag­is­trate Sarah De Sil­va, who at one point. read from the Sum­ma­ry Courts Act stat­ing that in­ter­rupt­ing the court was an of­fence and ad­vised him to stop in­ter­rupt­ing the court.

Wil­son, how­ev­er, claimed at one point that he re­quired med­ica­tion to curb his move­ments.

Mitchell even­tu­al­ly ar­rive at 11.22 am, al­low­ing for a 20-minute pe­ri­od to con­tin­ue the cross-ex­am­i­na­tion of the Min­is­ter in the Min­istry of the At­tor­ney Gen­er­al and Le­gal Af­fairs be­fore his de­par­ture.

Dur­ing the cross-ex­am­i­na­tion, Mitchell sought to con­firm if Hinds made a re­port con­cern­ing the Au­gust 14 in­ci­dent in per­son at the Besson Street Po­lice Sta­tion or via tele­phone.

Hinds said while he was not cer­tain of the ex­act date, he cer­tain­ly did make a re­port in per­son.

Mitchell al­so raised ques­tions as to if Hinds was cer­tain that through the group of noisy per­sons who fol­lowed him on that day, that he was cer­tain Wil­son had used ob­scene lan­guage, to which Hinds said he heard him.

Fol­low­ing Hinds’ dis­missal, the mat­ter was stood down un­til 1 pm, when lead in­ves­ti­ga­tor act­ing In­spec­tor Ran­dall McGuirk took the stand.

Mitchell ques­tioned McGuirk con­cern­ing the ab­sence of Wil­son’s name in a wit­ness state­ment sub­mit­ted by Hinds on Au­gust 27, when McGuirk took con­trol of the in­ves­ti­ga­tion.

Dur­ing the cross-ex­am­i­na­tion, McGuirk said he was on­ly aware that Hinds made a re­port to the In­ter-Agency Task Force base in the Beetham and via tele­phone to the Besson Street Po­lice Sta­tion.

How­ev­er, lead pros­e­cu­tor As­sis­tant Di­rec­tor of Pub­lic Pros­e­cu­tions (DPP) George Bus­by. in his re-ex­am­i­na­tion of McGuirk, asked if Wil­son’s name had been men­tioned in Hinds’ ini­tial state­ment to orig­i­nal in­ves­ti­ga­tor act­ing ASP Ed­mund Cum­ber­batch, which McGuirk con­firmed.

Hinds is ex­pect­ed to re­turn the stand when the mat­ter re­sumes on Jan­u­ary 17.

Reporter: Peter Christopher

Tags: 
Category: