‘Everything you say is a lie,’ defense counsel tells witness
The former girlfriend of accused murderer Raziel Jeffers testified Monday that he admitted to her that he had shot and killed Damion Ming.
She told the court that Jeffers had told her about receiving a phone call telling him where Ming was, where he went to get a gun, and how he rode a bicycle to Mr. Ming’s location in a yard in West Bay, where men were working on a boat.
She then related what she said was Jeffers’s description of the March 25, 2010 shooting: He waited at a corner of the house and when Ming stepped toward where he was, Jeffers stepped out directly in front of him. He said Ming threw his hands up in front of his face and Jeffers shot him. The first shot struck his left shoulder and Mr. Ming hit the boat. Jeffers shot him again, in the back. Mr. Ming fell and crawled under the boat and a few seconds later, Jeffers resumed fire.
The witness said Jeffers told her one of the men at the scene gave him time to leave and took a phone away from a woman when she tried to phone police about the shooting.
She told senior prosecutor Andrew Radcliffe that Jeffers had seemed very excited and proud when relating the details of the killing to her. She said Jeffers did not tell her anything about the bicycle or what happened to the gun.
She told the court that when Jeffers left home before the shooting occurred, he was wearing sneakers. When she saw him again, he was wearing flip-flops. She said he told her the sneakers had blood on them so he got rid of them and had borrowed flip-flops from his cousin.
She said he told her these things while she was staying with a relative of his.
The court heard that Jeffers had thought the witness was in a relationship with Mr. Ming. During a separation from Jeffers at the beginning of 2010, Mr. Ming had given her money for rent. She had known him about five years; she met him because he was the boyfriend of someone in her family. She said she and Ming were good friends, not boyfriend and girlfriend.
When she went back with Jeffers, he said no man would give her money without having sex and although she denied it, he wouldn’t believe her.
She told Justice Malcolm Swift and the 12-member jury that Mr. Ming and Jeffers had known each other, but after Ming came out of prison they didn’t associate any more. She said Ming started hanging out with guys from Logwood and apparently Jeffers felt he should have chosen Birch Tree Hill.
Asked if Jeffers regarded Mr. Ming as an enemy, she indicated, “If you go with those guys, you’re not with him.”
She admitted lying to police after the shooting, telling officers Jeffers was with her on the night of the shooting because he is the father of her child and she did not want harm to come to him. She noted that she was living with his family at the time and didn’t have anywhere else to go.
Later, she spoke with officers from the U.K. who had come to the island, and told them that Jeffers had confessed to her.
Defense counsel Michael Wolkind began his cross-examination by calling the witness the enemy of the truth and the enemy of a fair trial for Jeffers. He said the defense position was, “Everything you say is a lie.”
He asked if she was claiming that she saw Jeffers shoot Mr. Ming; she replied, “No, I am not saying that.”
He asked if she saw Jeffers with a gun or with a bicycle, or witnessed any arrangement for getting a bicycle or a gun. She said she did not: “All I know is what I was told.”
Mr. Wolkind suggested that the information she got was from general talk about the shooting and from one particular woman who had been her friend. The witness said that was incorrect.
He suggested that she had boasted that police were going to give her a lot money. She replied that she had told a relative police would help her financially.
She was then asked to look at phone records to see if they supported her account of going to Jeffers’s relative’s house the morning after Mr. Ming was shot and then Jeffers phoning her there. She had already said that was the phone call that led to her going to the residence of another of Jeffers’s relatives, which was where he made his confession.
She agreed she did not see the sequence of calls that would support her assertion, but pointed out that maybe it was not her phone that she got the call on. “No matter what number we spoke on, we spoke,” she told the court.
She was scheduled to continue testifying Tuesday.