Witness Says Calypso Farmer Was Suicidal Prior To His Death

13

The High Court heard testimonies from witnesses yesterday and according to a witness, ‘Calypso farmer’ Carmona Samuel had been quick-tempered and suicidal prior to his death, a court has heard.

Elon Ketwaroo, 37-year-old, is on trial for the murder of Samuel, her 72-year-old ex-partner.

Yesterday, a witness testified to seeing Ketwaroo running scared out of a side road on the day in question.

However, another witness, who is said to have known the deceased for around 40 years, stated that he was quick to anger and had previously made comments about killing himself.

She shared that Samuel told her he could not live without Ketwaroo, who he broke up with some time prior.

Elon Ketwaroo was charged with the capital offense days after Samuel was found dead at his home in September of 2017.

Police alleged the woman stabbed the 72-year-old in his chest during a domestic dispute.

However, it was reported that during the domestic dispute, they were both stabbed.

 

 

CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHATSAPP GROUP

13 COMMENTS

    • POSSIBLY THE OTHER WAY AROUND – EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION WITNESS?

      The question is ‘…Who jilted who?’

      Far more fundamental to the trial though, is what constitutes ‘…Murder.’

      The law speaks to Murder this way;

      (a) …Where a person of sound memory and discretion;

      (b) …Unlawfully kills another;

      (c) …With malice aforethought;

      (d) …Either express or implied (premeditation or with intent to kill; thought out and planned);

      (e) …Death occurs within a year and a day (365 Days+1 Day).

      Now on the evidence, if this is the ‘…Evidence of a Prosecution Witness,’ the Prosecution is sure going to find it difficult in removing ‘…Reasonable Doubt’ from the mind of the Jury.

      While the facts of the case are yet to be fully unfold, that which is the most critical for the Prosecution is prove is ‘…an Intention to Kill.’

      In the Greater charge of ‘…Murder,’ is the ‘Lesser charge of ‘…Manslaughter’ (without premeditation or with no intent to kill; e.g. a sudden quarrel and fight and a fatal blow was delivered to the body of the deceased).

      Even so, an accused person must still show that the ‘…force used was reasonable to defend him/herself.’

      The Jury shall determine if a man/woman was ‘…under imminent or actual attack,’ if such was the force ‘…necessary and reasonably expected to be used,’ to ‘…such extent and in such circumstances’ to defend him/herself or to save his/her own life.

      Such is a stipulation in the Constitution [CO: 1981: Section 4 (2) (a)].

      It is still early days yet in the trial.

      • NO CASE SUBMISSION SUSTAINED – ACCUSED WALKED FREE

        Just been apprised that following closure of the Case for the Prosecution, ‘…Defence Attorney Lawrence Daniels (with an associate),’ advanced legal arguments on a ‘…No Case Submission.’

        These legal arguments were advanced in the absence of the Jury.

        It was noted that a Pathologist had determined that the ‘…Cause of Death’ was due to a ‘…Wound to the Chest of the Deceased.’

        It was also revealed that the wound appeared;

        (a) ‘…Not to have penetrated deep into the chest cavity;

        (b) …Not to have caused damage to any vital organs – heart or lungs.’

        (c) …That no evidence was adduced to show whether or not the injury was self-inflicted or inflicted by the accused.

        (d) …That intestinal samples for suspected ingestion of a poisonous liquid had no ‘…Toxicology examination’ performed on such samples.

        Consequent upon the ‘…apparent inability of the Prosecution’ to make out a ‘…Prima Facie Case,’ the Court reportedly sustained the ‘…No Case Submission,’ and discharged the accused.’

        Therefore, the 37 year-old accused ‘…Walked Free,’ and for now, remains a free woman.

        It was not immediately known whether or not the ‘…Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)’ may appeal the …Trial Judge’s Decision’ to dismiss the indictment.

        Except the allegation, in view of uncertainties about the ‘…chest wound reportedly sustained by the deceased,’ particularly how it may have been inflicted and/or by whom, it might be futile to pursue the Case any further.

    • When willy no longer wakes up, old men with young women tend to become very insecure and in some cases behave erratic. They fear the young lady will leave them for a young broad back STALLION or STUD and start to accuse her of cheating without proof of such. These are the same old farts who will cheat on and/or leave their wives for a spring chicken but cannot keep up with said spring chicken. NO AMOUNT OF VIAGRA WILL DO.

  1. this man have a temper from years he just meet he match wid she long time he a bang up woman. ask he wife and children dem he no one easy how he live a so he die

  2. Two years and 4 months ago would have put her no way older than 35. What she have with a 72-year-old? The man more than double she age.

  3. Who someone chooses to love is no one’s business. Once the man or woman is of an age of consent. Personally I know the lady in question and she is a very sweet person. One of the nicest persons I know. It is however unfortunate that this had to happen to her. She is not the type of person that would intentionally hurt anyone much less to commit murder. People like to just jump to their own conclusion and assume the worst about someone. I shall not comment on the gentleman because I do not know him. I can only vouch for her because I know her.

    • NEVER you make the mistake and “vouch” for anyone!!! You may know her on a platonic level but when Dick and Hairy Bank get involved, it’s another thing. I don’t personally know the deceased, but apparently his REPUTATION precedes him. The kind of “man” who would shell some nasty wud at a female if she doesn’t respond to his advances. By now the police must know how to get to his yard with their eyes shut on a dark night. We reap what we sow (whether good or bad).

Comments are closed.