Witness sticks to evidence against Uchence Wilson gang
Witness Two says he went to the police with information about the gang’s activities because he was not happy with the fact that the criminal outfit had robbed some of his friends and he was displeased about the things that the gang members had done to some of their victims.
THE second witness in the Uchence Wilson gang trial yesterday maintained that he was telling the truth, despite repeated suggestions from defence attorneys that he was lying and made up stories about the gang and its existence.
The Crown witness, who is a former member of the gang, yesterday faced a number of questions from three different attorneys who tried unsuccessfully to get him to backtrack on his previous admissions, but the ex-gangster stood firm and insisted that he has stuck to the court’s expectation of him, which is to be truthful.
The witness, who is being referred to as Witness Two by the Jamaica Observer at the court’s instruction that all witnesses remain anonymous, and who has been testifying in the Home Circuit Court via video link during his evidence, spoke about a number of robberies that he participated in with the gang as well as those related by other gang members.
He also spoke about crimes the gang members had confessed to him about, including murders, assaults and rapes, which they allegedly committed during some of the robberies.
Yesterday, during the cross-examination of Witness Two, defence lawyers distanced their clients from the crimes as well as involvement in the gang.
“What you have said about Terrence (Wilson) being involved in these robberies is not true,” Attorney Lloyd McFarlane, who is representing the reputed gang leader, Uchence Wilson, said to the witness, who did not agree.
The attorney further suggested to the witness that his client was never involved in the gang and that witness Two had not seen him beating a man during a robbery in St Catherine, as he had previously told the court.
Sponsored Links
Cool way to light up the outside of her house without paying thousands of dollars!
LuminaBright
Fantastic Apartments in Hempstead have Seniors Packing Their Bags
Senior Living | Search Ads
But this was denied by the witness, who maintained that he was called to pick up members of the gang following a robbery and that on his arrival he saw Wilson beating a man who he was told had come out of his house to check sounds coming from his neighbour’s house, where they robbed.
Attorney C J Mitchell, who is representing the gang’s reputed deputy leader, Fitzroy Scott, and two other alleged gang members, Tashina Baker and Cornel Whyte, also suggested to the witness that he had lied about his reason for going to the police and that the real reason he had gone to them was to “save his skin and to prevent the police from charging him”. But the witness did not agree.
According to the witness, he went to the police with information about the gang’s activities because he was not happy with the fact that the criminal outfit had robbed some of his friends and because he was displeased about the things that the gang members had done to some of their victims.
The witness also rubbished claims that he had “cut a deal” with the police to avoid criminal charges, noting that he was still not sure if he would be charged or not.
According to the witness, who gave a statement to the police after he was arrested in 2017, he did not approach the lawmen before his arrest because he did not trust them, as some were working with the gang.
Attorney Mitchell also suggested to the witness that he had made up the stories about the robberies in order to save himself from being charged, but the witness reputed this.
Witness Two also denied suggestions that he had lied about receiving instructions from Scott and his claims that he was involved in some of the robberies.
Another attorney, Vanessa Taylor, who is representing Stephenson Bennett, also told the witness that he was not being truthful about his reason for going to the police.
“I am suggesting to you that you are not telling the truth why you gave the statement to the police,” she said.
“Am telling the truth, ma’am,” he answered.
“You need a gang to exist in order to save yourself,” she further asserted.
“No ma’am,” Witness Two answered.
He also rejected the suggestion from Taylor that the evidence he had given to the court was merely fiction.
Witness Two, however, agreed that most of the robberies that he told the court about were told to him by others and that he could not be completely certain about what had happened in those instances, as he was not there.
Witness Two will continue to undergo more cross-examination today.