Three accused men in the high-profile killing of Customs officer Nigel Christian told police they had nothing to do with his death, the court heard as their recorded interviews were presented before Justice Rajiv Persaud.
Prosecutors allege that Saleim Harrigan, Wayne Thomas and Lasean Bully abducted Christian from his McKinnons home on July 10, 2020, before he was later found shot dead along a dirt road in Thibou’s.
The interviews, read into evidence by investigators from the Serious Crimes Unit, showed a consistent pattern of denial from all three men — though their willingness to answer questions shifted when confronted with evidence.
Bully initially distanced himself from the crime, saying, “I know nothing about that,” while struggling to clearly explain his movements that day. In a follow-up interview, he declined to answer any questions, responding only with “no comment.”
Harrigan also rejected the allegations, telling police he had remained near home and had no connection to the areas linked to the investigation. At one point, he swore on his family that he had no involvement. But when investigators presented phone data and images tied to the case, he stopped engaging, later saying, “Me nah have nuttin to do with this ya and me no have no comment.”
Thomas, in his own statements, said he spent the day between a bike shop and a visit to his child’s mother. He denied knowing Christian or visiting his neighbourhood. Even after being confronted with DNA evidence, he maintained, “I don’t know anything about that,” and rated his own honesty as perfect.
One remaining statement is expected to be read into evidence on Friday, after which the prosecution is set to close its case and the defence will begin its arguments.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
In every operation there are “Spotters”
Gad nar sleep
WHAT THE HELL…! ….SEEMED THE ‘…JUDGES RULE-NAMELY ‘…RULE 3 AND 4’ WERE BREACHED: …REFRESHER COURSES FOR ‘…QUACK INVESTIGATORS?
***
Snippets of news at ‘…ANR’ news portal are troubling.’
Though they clearly do not know, ‘…REPORTERS,’ seemed to have reported what they clearly heard.
***
To understand the ‘…SNIPPET OF NEWS,’ is to first understand the ‘…JUDGES RULE 1 -4:
The first ‘RULE’ says to ‘…Criminal Investigators:
‘ …Whenever a Police officer is trying to ascertain (find out):
(a) ‘…WHETHER: or
(b) …BY WHOM AN OFFENCE HAS BEEN COMMITTED:
(c) …HE MAY QUESTION ANY PERSON: from
(d) …WHOM HE BELIEVES USEFUL INFORMATION’ MAY BE OBTAINED.’
***
NOTA BENE: (NB)
It matters not whether a person is in ‘…POLICE CUSTODY.’
***
JUDGES RULE 2:
This ‘…WARNS THE ‘…CROOKED AND STUPID’ OFFICERS: that
(a) ‘…AS SOON AS THE OFFICER OBTAINS EVIDENCE: which
(b) …AFFORDS REASONABLE GROUNDS: that
(c) …AN OFFENCE HAS BEEN COMMITTED: and that
(d) …CHARLESWORTH TABOR: has been
(e) …REASONABLY SUSPECTED AS THE PERPETRATOR: the
(f) …THE POLICE OFFICER (not the crooked and stupid): shall
(g) …CAUTION THE ‘…SUSPECTED:’ this way
(i) …YOU ARE NOT OBLIGED TO SAY ANYTHING: unless
(ii) …YOU WISH TO DO SO: and that
(iii) …WHATEVER YOU SAY: will be
(iv) …PUT INTO WRITING: and
(v) …MAY BE GIVEN IN EVIDENCE.’
***
BLOCK-HEADED INVESTIGATORS:
Here is where most ‘…BLOCK-HEADED’ INVESTIGATORS,’ often seemed to have ‘…EXPLOITED’ the ignorance of criminal suspects.
***
JUDGES RULES: 3 AND 4
These ‘…RULE’ tells the ‘…PROFESSIONALLY-TRAINED INVESTIGATOR,’ WHENEVER A PERSON HAS BEEN:
(i) ‘…CHARGED WITH AN OFFENCE: or
(ii) …INFORMED THAT HE/SHE MAY BE PROSECUTED: he/she
(iii) …SHALL BE CAUTIONED:
‘…Do you wish to say anything: …You are not oblige to say anything…’
***
CAUTION BEFORE PUTTING QUESTIONS:
(a) ‘…I WISH TO PUT SOME FURTHER QUESTIONS TO YOU:
(b) …YOU ARE NOT OBLIGED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION: but
(c) …IF YOU DO:
(d) …THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: will
(e) …BE PUT INTO WRITING: and
(f) …GIVEN IN EVIDENCE.’
***
TWO STRIKING THINGS:
Even as many aspects of the trial have been reported in the news, ‘…TWO STRIKING THINGS’ DEFENCE ATTORNEYS APPEARED NOT TO HAVE CHALLENGED:
(i) THE ‘…CAUTION AND INTERROGATORY STATEMENTS:
These, seemingly are of no evidential value.
***
WHY…?
THEY ARE ‘…NEGATIVE AND NON-INCRIMINATORY.
***
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: …INTERVIEW
(The process mistakenly called by untrained investigators ‘…INTERVIEW’).
***
TRAINING AND KNOWLEDGE:
To those seemingly lacking ‘…TRAINING AND KNOWLEDGE,’ it is called:
(c) ‘…INTERROGATION.’
Such always represents the most critical part of the ‘…INVESTIGATIVE’ process.
***
WHAT DUFFERS SHALL KNOW
NO CRIMINAL SUSPECT’ is obliged to ‘…INCRIMINATE’ himself in ‘…ACTS OF CRIMINALITY.’
***
WHAT THE HELL…!
END OF ‘…JUDGES RULES’ LESSON.
TRAINING SAID TO BE A RECOMMENDATION BY ‘…LEAD DEFENCE ATTORNEY-WENDELL ROBINSON.’ TIMELY SUGGESTION.
.***
ONE SHALL STUDY THE ‘…JUDGE’S RULES’ AND HOW THEY SHALL BE APPLIED.
***
Comments are closed.