Two men who were arrested and charged two years ago for an illegal firearm found in one of their homes were freed of gun charges.
Tyrone Foster and Nicholas Davis were found not guilty of illegal possession of firearm and ammunition after the judge on Monday upheld no-case submissions made on their behalf by their lawyers, Kemar Robinson and Denise Hinson, respectively.
The men were among six men arrested on July 8, at Davis’ Southboro, Portmore, St Catherine, home after police went to a house on a targeted operation and allegedly found a weapon in a clothes basket.
Foster, who was staying at the house following an earlier fire at his home, was allegedly seen by police standing in the house with a weapon in his hand before the gun was reportedly found in the basket.
During the trial, the police witness testified that he stayed behind the grille on the verandah and saw, Davis with a gun through a one inch pane of glass in the front door.
The officer said when he went inside he found the weapon inside the basket, beside Davis.
The police witness said he was able to see, as the light was turned on after he went to the premises at 4 a.m. and knocked.
His colleague, however, testified that he went there at 6 a.m. and was aided by natural sunlight.
The weapon which was reportedly found was tested and found to contain both men’s DNA.
The alleged weapon that was found was inscribed with ‘WA’ but one of the officers testified that he wrote ‘WH’ on it.
The trial also heard from the scene of crime officer that he was called to process a gun found in Old Harbour and further that the officers submitted 19 rounds to the lab even though the gun had a 17-round capacity magazine.
Additionally, the gun that was exhibited was full black but the officer testified that the weapon that he found was black and chrome.
During her submissions, Hinson questioned the officer who had taken all six men’s DNA about the method used.
The officer who had labelled all the samples using letters of the alphabet could not tell the court how she was able to say which sample belonged to which defendant as she did not take any notes.
She also could not explain why the DNA samples were taken to the laboratory one month later and under what conditions they were stored.
Robinson in his submission argued that the court could not say for certain whether the weapon exhibited was the weapon that the police said they found.
– Tanesha Mundle
Follow The Gleaner on X and Instagram @JamaicaGleaner and on Facebook @GleanerJamaica. Send us a message on WhatsApp at 1-876-499-0169 or email us at [email protected] or [email protected].
