Junior Dowie/Staff Photographer
Attorney-at-law K. Churchill Neita, lead defence lawyer in the Kraal murder trial, addresses a press conference yesterday concerning reactions to Tuesday's not-guilty verdict, at his colleague's law office on Duke Street in downtown Kingston. At left is attorney-at-law Deborah Martin.Omar Anderson, Gleaner Writer
K. Churchill Neita Q.C., lead defence lawyer in the just-concluded Kraal murder case, said Chief Justice Lensley Wolfe did not err in allowing a juror known to him (Neita) to remain on the 12-member panel.
According to Neita, the prosecution, led by Director of Public Prosecutions Kent Pantry, had raised the matter before Chief Justice Wolfe in chambers.
The juror, an architect, is vice-president of the Liguanea Club, of which Mr. Neita is president.
"The Chief Justice didn't err," he said., during a press conference at the Duke Street, downtown Kingston, chambers of attorney-at-law Valerie Neita-Robertson, a defence lawyer in the Kraal trial.
He added: "There was abso-lutely no basis in rejecting this juror. You cannot reject a juror because he might be known to either the defence or prosecution lawyers. You cannot reject him on that basis alone. You have to reject him if you have reason to believe he's not likely to perform the function for which he has taken the oath."
According to Mr. Neita, Chief Justice Wolfe made this point "abundantly clear" when the matter was raised before him.
On Tuesday, a 12-member jury acquitted Senior Super-intendent of Police (SSP) Reneto Adams and two other policemen, who were charged with the May 7, 2003 murder of four persons in Kraal, Clarendon.
Underscoring the defence's point, the lead attorney claimed that the aunt of an employee from the office of the DPP was also a member of the jury.
in favour with Adams
Mr. Neita added there were a number of persons who initially refused to be empanelled because they disclosed they would rule in SSP Adams' favour.
On Wednesday, Delroy Chuck, Jamaica Labour Party spokesman on justice, criticised the not-guilty Kraal verdict, stating that the trial was compromised because of the failure of a prosecution witness to give evidence. He said the verdict showed that the justice system had passed the point of mere concern, and was now in "deep crisis".
But yesterday, Mr. Neita fired back, stating that the trial was conducted with "eminent fairness".
"It is a trial that the state had all its resources employed to ensure the prosecution presented the best case it could," he said.
He expressed regret at the loss of lives at Kraal.
