Crown’s case a ‘shambles’ in EE drug robbery, says lawyer

(CNS): One lawyer called the crown’s case a “shambles” Friday as he presented his closing argument to the jury for one of three men accused of being involved in a robbery and drug dealing conspiracy following an incident at an East End beach last Christmas Eve. Marvin Gregory Grant, Fred Allon McLaughlin and Al Elford McLaughlin have all denied being involved in the conspiracy, in which a masked man armed with a machete took what was said to be a substantial haul of cocaine that had washed up at the Morritt’s resort and was being held by staff in anticipation of the arrival of the police. 

None of the three men have responded to the crown’s case by taking the stand, but on Friday attorneys Anthony Akiwumi and Laurence Aiolfi, lawyers representing Grant and Fred McLaughlin respectively, put their clients’ position to the jury, when they not only challenged what they said was weak circumstantial evidence presented during the trial but questioned whether a robbery had even taken place.

Grant is accused by the crown of being the man who approached the beach, wearing a white t-shirt around his head and carrying a machete, and told hotel staff, “This is for me,” before making off with the drugs.

But Akiwumi questioned the identification of his client, which he said was based on poor quality CCTV. He said the crown had presented a purely circumstantial case in which there were significant contradictions, as well as differences in descriptions of what the robber was wearing and the car in which he came and went.

He also referred to racial slurs that had been made by a police officer in the case during his evidence and questioned the integrity of the officer. Detailing what he saw as all the problems with the crown’s case that made it not add up, Akiwumi pointed to the lack of resistance from anyone at the hotel, including the security guard, who was an ex-special forces officer in Jamaica, implying that there were many unanswered questions about this case. He said the crown was asking the jury to fill in the gaps and it had not proved its case.

Aiolfi also challenged the case against his client Fred McLaughlin. The crown claimed that phone evidence proved that he had been involved in the conspiracy and that he had used his truck to try to block a security guard who was chasing the masked man.

However, McLaughlin had told police that he had driven into the Morritt’s car park that day to see if there was anyone he knew in the bar, but shortly after pulling up he saw some commotion and decided to leave.

Aiolfi said there was no indication that McLaughlin was blocking anyone. He said that McLaughlin appears to frequently use his phone and was even talking to someone completely unrelated to this case at the moment he was pulling into the car park, when the crown claimed he was supposed to be “the muscle”. The jury, therefore, could not infer anything from the phone calls, he said.

Aiolfi said McLaughlin talked to many people that day, including his co-defendants as they are all friends. He told the jury that they had to look closely at what the crown was claiming and if they did, they would see that the prosecution’s evidence would pull them further away from what they wanted them to infer.

Detailing the various holes and inconsistencies and the lack of evidence against McLaughlin, he questioned what role his client could possibly have had and said that “the crown’s theory is a shambles”.

The case continues Monday.