An unexpected row erupted in Coroner’s Court yesterday after a litany of accusations by Rodney Moncur against the court prompted Coroner Linda Virgil to call him “vindictive and spiteful.”
On a day when the much awaited testimony of Principal Prison Officer Van Johnson and inmate Forrester Bowe was to have taken centre stage, everyone in the courtroom seemed unprepared for the turn of events after Director of Public Prosecutions Bernard Turner rose to express his displeasure over Moncur’s accusations to the media that the inquest was nothing more than a “disguised preliminary inquiry.”
After getting a grasp of Mr Turner’s complaint and recognising that, as a layman. Mr Moncur may have misinterpreted the role of the coroner’s inquest, Coroner Virgill went on to explain to him, among other things, that the proceedings were in fact not a preliminary inquiry.
She advised him to familiarize himself with the laws governing a coroner’s inquest and then told him that matters taking place in the court are not subject to discussion in the media.
Upon hearing the advice, Mr Moncur, who appeared to be agitated, proceeded to lambaste Coroner Virgill and Mr Turner by insisting that they were interfering with his constitutional rights to free speech. He continued to inform the Coroner that she was wrong for allowing inmate Ellison Smith to appear before her, as he was the “murderer” of her husband.
Almost ignoring Mr Moncur’s outbursts, the Coroner remained focused, as she patiently outlined the duties of the Coroner and function of the inquest.
Mr Moncur, however, continued to place the blame for inmate Smith’s appearance on the Coroner and Mr Turner, only to be informed that Smith’s appearance resulted from evidence he gave concerning the prison break in early January.
Coroner Virgill sternly reminded Mr Moncur that everyone was given a fair and open opportunity to testify, and in most cases, advised that they did not have to give testimony. Therefore, she said, Mr Moncur was wrong “utterly wrong” to impugn anyone in the proceedings.
However, despite the Coroner’s attempt to educate Mr Moneur on the marshaling of evidence and the appearance of witnesses in a coroner’s matter, he continued to badger her over Smith’s appearance, telling the Coroner at one point that she was “immoral” for “allowing a man that murdered your husband to take the stand.”
Clearly incensed by Mr Moncur’s insistence and his continuous references to the “man that murdered your husband,” Coroner Virgill finally laced into Mr Moncur and said: “I had no difficulty with it and neither did the witness. Clearly you are a vindictive and spiteful person, and you need to learn how to forgive a person.”
After the battle of words, Mr Moncur eventually excused himself from the proceedings, but not before telling the court: “The government is wrong.”
Once calm was restored in the courtroom, the Coroner and prosecutors once again turned their attention to witnesses and the evidence that they were there to provide.
The first witness to take the stand, Principal Officer Van Johnson, despite the build-up to his testimony, denied allegations of supplying inmates with contraband goods; in particular, hacksaw blades and drugs.
The Principal Officer inferred that items, like hacksaw blades, could have easily been obtained by any inmate with duties in the mechanic, welding, or plumbing shops. These tools, he said, can be found in those shops.
Saying that he did not want to incriminate himself or give adverse reports on the matter, Mr Johnson did not say whether or not he worked on the Monday preceding the inmates’ escape. Instead he said that the only days that he had off during the week were Saturday and Sunday.
He did admit knowing most of the inmates involved in the break, but also said that, as a prison officer, “you really don’t want to know them.”
When asked why he felt this way, Mr Johnson said he did not want to have sympathy for them because they had committed crimes, something that he may presumably have if he interacted with them as if they were out on the streets.
He was later asked by the Coroner if he was a disciplinarian or “harsh” prison officer, and his reply was, “Yes. I think so.”
Asked again to explain his answer, Mr Johnson said he has a group of men who work under him whom he counsels and that he expects them to abide by the rules and regulations. This prompted Coroner Virgill to ask, “Why would people say these things about you?”
“I have no idea, madame,” said Officer Johnson. “They may have some malice towards me.”
With this Principal Officer Johnson ended his testimony, and the first cousin of Rodney Moncur, inmate Forrester Bowe was next to take the witness stand.
Bowe took the stand with a letter from National Security in hand, and after being cautioned, he went on to inform the Coroner that the letter was sent to him by the agency to be signed, despite his not being allowed to have visits from his counsel.
Even though Bowe has been given a little more than a week to be advised, he told the Coroner that he has not been successful, as prison authorities have refused all of the incriminated prisoners from seeing their lawyers.
As a result, Bowe said that he would refrain from giving evidence, and Coroner Virgill informed him that she can no longer delay this matter any further until he is advised, as that could be never.
She told Bowe that he would no longer be called on to give testimony in the proceedings and informed him that he was free to leave.
Subsequent to this, the argument between Mr Turner, Mr Moncur, and Coroner Virgill continued.
The next witness called was Emmanuel Jacks, a thirteen-year veteran officer at Her Majesty’s Prison, who is accused of threatening the recaptured prisoners while they awaited return to prison.
In his testimony, Officer Jacks remembered arriving on Yamacraw Road sometime after 4am to see Neil Brown, Barry Parcoi and Forrester Bowe already apprehended.
Officer Jacks was not able to offer any information about the prisoners’ activity as it related to their boarding and occupying a prison bus, as he said that he had left, the scene and returned to the prison.
Between informing personnel at the female prison about Bowles’ death and wandering off to have a private cry after returning to the prison, Mr Jacks said that he could not really concentrate on particulars about the prisoners on the night of the breakout.
During his testimony about Officer Bowles. Jacks became emotional and broke down on the stand, prompting Coroner Virgill to allow for a 20minute health break.
Returning to the stand. Jacks was directly asked whether he touched any of the prisoners or tossed anything at the bus while on Yamacraw Road or in the prison. “No,” he replied, as he would not have been able to do either with a gun in his hand.
After an emotionally charged day, the proceeding were adjourned to l0am today.
By MARK HUMES, The Tribune
