Who is popular today?

THE credibility of the retired detective police inspector, who was the first to lead gang investigations in the St Catherine North Division from 2015, was placed under the proverbial microscope on Tuesday as he was accused of trying to shore up his 'low ratings' of convictions amongst alleged gangsters by fabricating evidence against accused members of the Klansman gang, 33 of whom are now on trial.The former policeman, who has testified that he has read hundreds of files and a thousand or more statements dealing exclusively with gang matters, said he "interfaced with, talked to, carried out operations against, and interviewed both active members of the gang as well as past members".On Tuesday, however, he came under heavy attack after defence attorneys baited and chided him for his seemingly spotty recollection of key dates relating to several of the accused.The former lawman last week testified that in September 2017 he haggled with the only female accused, Stephanie Christie, alias Mumma - a supposedly top-tier member of the Klansman gang - for two of the criminal outfit's best rifles in return for the release of reputed leader Andre "Blackman" Bryan. At the time he told the court that Christie had attempted to bribe him by offering him $100,000 in exchange for Bryan's release. He said he had not arrested Christie for trying to bribe him as his plan was to use her to get information on the gang over the course of several telephone calls, messages and in-person meetings. On Monday he repeated the narrative for Bryan's attorney, Lloyd McFarlane.Under cross-examination Tuesday by attorney Alexander Shaw, counsel for Christie, the retired policeman - who said he had met Christie for the first time in 2017 - testified that the 'deal' for the rifles had been struck from March that year but that he had continued to make enquiries."You didn't tell counsel yesterday that it was September of 2017 that you were offered money to release Blackman?" Shaw queried."That question was asked, and I was answering in respect of a follow-up offer concerning the firearm, which was offered by Mumma, and I was continuing to respond to the offer because I didn't get those firearms," the retired lawman said."Aren't you just sitting there and misleading the court?" Shaw countered."I'm not misleading the court," the ex-policeman replied calmly."What are you doing? You are lying?" Shaw asked quietly."No," was the equally serene reply.Said Shaw: "Yesterday you told this court, in response to when it is that you are claiming that Mumma offered you the $100,000 to release Blackman, that it was in September of 2017; the record is there.""I am saying I was referring to follow-up pertaining to the firearms that I did not get in September," the unflappable former cop declared."So, the deal was in January of 2017?" Shaw asked querulously."No, it was in March," the former policeman replied."In March; so you are adding another month?" Shaw demanded, to a ripple of loud mutterings from defence attorneys and stirring amongst the accused in dock one.The former detective inspector's evidence regarding the timing of a statement he produced on the instructions of the lead detective in the matter was also challenged by Shaw.According to Shaw, the ex-lawman had written a statement in which he said he had been contacted by the lead detective in April 2021 about audio recordings but had not written a statement until around six months after, at which point "the trial was in full swing".The former cop, however, insisted that he did not remember the date but said he had put together that statement "perhaps the next day thereabouts or shortly after"."So, September 2021 was shortly after April 2021? That's when you signed the statement," Shaw asked."If that statement is dated that, it could be that I made adjustments or had the statement on the system and I just changed the date. I am not certain what that is about," the former cop offered.Again, his reply caused a stir in the dock with accused Pete Miller, alias Smokie, declaring loudly, "Changes nuh, changes nuh, a mek yuh mek it up."Added Shaw: "By editing the statement yuh never remember fi add seh Mumma offer yuh two rifle?"The witness replied this would have been so based on the statement he was asked to produce.Shaw, later in his cross-examination, contested the witness's account of an October 21, 2017 date on which he said he had made a court appearance, since that day happened to have been a Saturday, as well as the absence from the visitors' log at Horizon Adult Remand Centre of any record of his visit to the accused Jason Brown, whom he charged.At the same time, the lawyer attempted to spotlight the ex-lawman's endeavours to see cases through to conviction."How many of the 300 persons that you interviewed in relation to the Klansman gang were convicted? How many you charged?" Shaw wanted to know.The former policeman, in admitting that several had been charged but only two convicted so far since the 2014 enactment of the anti-gang law, said he could not remember how many accused he had charged but added, "some of them are in the docks now"."I'm suggesting to you that you have fabricated your evidence in an effort to get a conviction," Shaw declared."I disagree," the former lawman retorted.The trial continues today at 10:00 am in the Home Circuit Division of the Supreme Court in downtown Kingston.