Cop witness claims to be mastermind behind Moruga murders in letter to DPP

The trial of the six police officers charged with the murders of three Moruga friends in 2011 took another bizarre turn when the State’s main witness was questioned about an alleged handwritten, signed statement she sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions on April 3, claiming she was the mastermind behind two of the murders, and had threatened her colleagues.

For a third day, WPC Nicole Clement has refused to answer any question posed to her by lead prosecutor Gilbert Peterson, SC, and lead defence attorney, Israel Khan.

Throughout the entire day’s sitting on Wednesday, she sat deadpan in the witness box, only speaking to give the affirmation and to say she “will not speak further on the matter.”

“I will not be saying anything…I have nothing to say,” she repeatedly told Peterson during his cross-examination of her, which began after the testimony she gave at the Princes Town magistrates’ court in 2013 at the preliminary inquiry into the murders was read out to the jury.

On Monday, Clement was deemed a hostile witness by Justice Carla Brown-Antoine, who is presiding over the trial at the Hall of Justice, Port of Spain.

Before the judge are Sgt Khemraj Sahadeo, along with PCs Ronald Riveiro, Glenn Singh, Roger Nicholas, Safraz Juman and Antonio Ramadhin.

The six are charged with the murders of Abigail Johnson, 23, Alana Duncan, 28, and Kerron “Fingers” Eccles on July 22, 2011.

Clement was also charged with the murders, but those charges were discontinued after she was given immunity to testify against her six colleagues.

From her evidence at the inquiry, she claimed two of the three Moruga friends – a man and woman – initially survived the “gunfight” at Barrackpore and were taken to a lonely road off the M2 Ring Road, Woodland, where they were executed on Sahadeo’s instructions.

Her evidence at the inquiry also detailed steps her colleagues allegedly took to cover up the killings and her signing a report prepared by two of them, which she testified was false.

Clement testified that she did so because it was “normal police culture,” where “everyone sticks together and writes the same report…One squad, one song,”

During his cross-examination, Peterson recounted the evidence she previously gave and ended by suggesting to her that her evidence at the inquiry was truthful, notwithstanding the position she has now adopted.

She remained silent.

She also refused to acknowledge drawings of the crime scenes based on what she told investigators during their probe of the incident.

Khan then began his cross-examination but asked for her to be directed to take off the face mask she was wearing.

To her, he suggested she was now seeking to extricate herself from the three murders by giving “false, sinister, wicked and diabolical” statements implicating the accused in the “execution” of the three friends.

Unlike when she told Peterson she would not respond to his questions, she remained expressionless and silent when questioned by Khan.

She only told him once, “I wish not to say anything further in this matter.”

As he posed his questions to her, the judge had to issue a reminder that questions from attorneys were not evidence, only the responses of the witness.

Khan thundered that her “wicked, evil statement” was given so the murder charges against her would be dropped and she would become a witness for the State.

“You have now decided not to give evidence at this trial of your own volition, despite your affirmation that you would give evidence.

“Furthermore, you have concocted a false, wicked and diabolical statement to extricate yourself from giving evidence.”

He then read from her alleged April 3 handwritten statement to the DPP. In it, she claimed she said after the shooting at Barrackpore, she told Riviero it was “looking s--tty” and had her feeling uneasy.

“Did you say that?” asked Khan.

Silence.

The letter also claimed she told him they had to “finish off” the man and woman.

Khan also put to her that in that statement she said he objected to her plan and after an exchange of words, she threatened him with her gun.

In that statement, she allegedly claimed she instructed Riviero, Juman and Nicholas to follow her instructions or they would “experience a different side of Clemy.”

She also allegedly threatened Nicholas with her weapon.

“Did you write that and send it to the DPP of this country?” asked Khan.

Silence.

That statement also alleged she gave the instructions to turn into a dirt road off the M2 Ring Road, ordering her colleagues to take the two civilians out of the police vehicle and finish them off.

It also alleged Juman tried to run but she fired her MP5 machine gun into the air.

“He stopped and returned,” she allegedly said, and then ordered Nicholas to gather all the officers’ weapons and put them in the vehicle.

The statement further claimed Clement said everything the three officers did was “under duress” because she had her MP5 on them.

“They complied with all my instructions as they were extremely fearful,” said the alleged handwritten, signed statement, which was delivered to the DPP by a police constable from the St Clair Police Station.

It went on to allege she wanted to “clear” her colleagues’ names as it was “unfair” they had been in prison for almost 13 years because of “my actions.”

Khan declared, “I put it to you that entire entire document is false. You made it up for the DPP not to call you here so you won’t be exposed under forensic cross-examination as a liar…

"Just as you gave a false statement implicating accused numbers 1, 2, 4 and 5, for the murder charges to be dropped (against you), you make a false statement as the mastermind so the DPP won’t call you here so nobody can expose you as a blatant liar,” Khan told the witness.

He was again met with silence.

He suggested to her in 2011, she had only been a police officer for five years and was only assigned to the robbery squad for two months.

“They were not your friends. You never fraternised with them…

"These were serving men putting their lives on the line as dedicated officers…and accused number two told you of a telephone call to ‘finish them off’ and they went and killed these people in your presence and they did not know you well?"

He again went through the evidence she gave at the preliminary inquiry, asking if she did not tell relatives, a close police friend, her pastor or a social worker of the “execution" in the days after the incident.

“Only when you were treated as a suspect you decided to give a false statement implicating them (the accused).”

He further suggested to her that she assisted in “planting gloves and (spent) shells” at the crime scene to “save yourself.”

He reminded her of her evidence at the inquiry that the shooting was an act of self-defence, as she and her colleagues were on a “lawful mission” to arrest a suspect.

In his opening address, Peterson claimed the officers were targeting Duncan’s common-law husband, Shumba James, who testified earlier in the trial. James narrowly escaped because he went in a friend’s vehicle, while the trio followed in the Nissan B15 that he was known to have used.

As he recounted more of her evidence, Khan put to Clement it was a “figment of her imagination.”

“You make up everything to become a state witness.”

He also put to her that she did not know Peterson, as an experienced prosecutor, would be able to get her evidence before the jury.

Clement remained silent and stony-faced as she looked at Khan while he questioned her.

She returns to court on Thursday as the trial continues.

The six police officers are also represented by attorneys Ulric Skerritt and Arissa Maharaj.

Also appearing for the State are Elaine Greene, Giselle Ferguson-Heller and Katiesha Ambrose-Persadsingh.