Lawyers sum up arguments in Jeffers murder trial
The key witness in the murder trial of Raziel Jeffers for the killing of a “numbers man” in a botched robbery should be seen as “troubled but truthful,” lead prosecutor Cheryll Richards argued Tuesday as she made her closing argument.
The evidence of Jeffers’s ex-girlfriend Megan Martinez, who claims he told her he organized and played a role in the robbery that led to the death of Marcos Duran in West Bay in 2010, is central to the Crown’s case.
There is no suggestion that Jeffers pulled the trigger, but the prosecution say he is guilty of murder because he planned and assisted the crime that led to the fatal shooting.
Jeffers’s lawyer, Brian O’Neill QC, in his closing argument, listed 28 reasons why he said the evidence of Ms. Martinez, on which the case turns, should not be trusted. He argued that she was motivated by a combination of revenge against her former lover and a desire to make money and get out of the gang lifestyle through the witness protection program.
He said she was not honest, truthful or reliable and urged the jury to dismiss her evidence and find Jeffers not guilty of murder or manslaughter.
Earlier, Ms. Richards said Ms. Martinez was a credible witness who had broken free from the influence of Jeffers and found the courage to talk.
“She was mixed up in guns and drugs from an early age, she had a child for him, she was living with him, totally under his influence,” she said. “At the time, she must have seemed to him to be the perfect controllable confidante. She told you she thought of him as the most powerful force to be reckoned with.”
She said Jeffers had told her his plan to rob Duran – a numbers man who was a regular visitor to her aunt’s house on Maliwinas Way – because he never expected her to have the courage to talk.
But, she said, Ms. Martinez had reached a point in her life where she was prepared to take responsibility for her own actions and tell the truth.
“She is not motivated by money or revenge. She is no more or less than an honest witness who is doing her best to tell the truth.
“We say she is a young lady who has walked on the wrong side. She submitted (to Jeffers), but now she feels strong enough and courageous enough to tell the truth.”
She said Ms. Martinez had been candid about her own failings and that “there was no pretence about her” when she gave evidence. She said parts of her story were corroborated by phone logs and other evidence, including witness statements, suggesting this lent credence to the rest of her story.
Mr. O’Neill, in his closing argument, suggested Ms. Martinez’s evidence could not be relied on. He said she was a proven liar who had been mixed up with a rival gang and had a clear motive to give false evidence against her ex-boyfriend, who he said had later married her cousin.
“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned,” he said – joking that it was a brave comment to make in front of an 11-woman, one-man jury.
“I submit that you should not believe her on what she says she was told happened at Maliwinas Way that night. If you have doubts about her truthfulness and reliability, given that without her there is nothing, you must find Raziel Jeffers not guilty,” he said.
He reminded the jury that Jordan Manderson – one of the men who Ms. Martinez’s testimony suggested was involved in the robbery of Mr. Duran had been cleared of the murder – even though DNA evidence showed he had been at the scene and had received a gunshot wound on the night.
He pointed out that several others had been arrested or investigated in connection with the crime but only Jeffers was left in the dock.
“Raziel Jeffers is the only one at risk of conviction for anything that happened that night – a man who on the Crown’s own evidence not only did not fire the fatal shot but was not there when the shot was fired. Would you want your son convicted in those circumstances? Would you want your son convicted on the basis of the uncorroborated, unsupported evidence of Megan Martinez?” he asked.
He urged the jury to dismiss her evidence completely. But he added that if they were sure that her account was accurate, they could only return a verdict of manslaughter – not murder.
He said the evidence, if accepted, was that Jeffers had supplied a single gun for the robbery and had only intended to frighten the numbers man and not to hurt him.
“The overwhelming number of armed robberies don’t result in the murder of the person being robbed,” he said. To convict Jeffers of murder, he said, the jury would have to be sure that Mr. Duran’s death was a probable consequence of the plan he is said to have put into action.
Related Videos
