The prosecution yesterday closed its case in the Neesa Gopaul murder trial, after the cross-examination of a state witness, who firmly disagreed with suggestions by the defence that her testimony in the matter was given in exchange for a reduction in her prison sentence.
The witness, Simone Diane De Nobrega, is a former cellmate of Bibi Sharima-Gopaul, who is jointly charged with Jarvis Small, called ‘Barry’ with the murder of her16-year-old daughter.
De Nobrega surrendered to police on Thursday before taking the witness stand as she had been previously convicted in a lower court and sentenced in absentia to five years imprisonment over obtaining credit by false pretence. De Nobrega had absconded before her trial came to an end.
Responding to questions from State Counsel Diana Kaulesar, after testifying on Thursday, De Nobrega said she never returned for her court hearings, because she feared for her life and that of her two sons, since she had received threats from persons associated with Sharima-Gopaul after she revealed to police what the woman had told her regarding her daughter’s death.
In her evidence-in-chief on Thursday, De Nobrega said Sharima-Gopaul had confided in her, that it was not she, but her lover and now co-accused, Small, who murdered her daughter by bashing her head in with a piece of wood.
De Nobrega said she had promised her cellmate with whom she became friends, that she would have kept secret what she had confided in her.
The witness, however, told the court that she would not have been able to live with herself if she had kept such a secret, adding that, as a mother herself of two sons, “I couldn’t carry such a weight.” The woman added, “Neesa deserved to get justice and no matter what, Neesa didn’t deserve to die by the hands of someone she trusted; someone that was supposed to protect her.”
Under cross-examination by attorney George Thomas, Sharima-Gopaul’s attorney, De Nobrega vehemently denied that her testimony was in exchange for a reduced prison sentence.
She maintained that it was because she wanted “justice for Neesa.”
De Nobrega said she learnt of her conviction sometime last year and when asked by counsel why she did not turn herself in sooner, such as last week or the week before, the witness firmly responded; “I turned myself in yesterday [Thursday].”
Asked by counsel whether she is still fearful for her life and how she knew she had to testify, De Nobrega respectively answered in the affirmative and stated “I read the newspapers.”
Quizzed as to why she used different words in her testimony in the Magistrates Court as against what she said in the High Court as she related that she said what Sharima-Gopaul had told her.
The witness said that while she may not have used the exact words in every instance, she nonetheless accurately related what her cellmate had told her.
Justice Singh also pointed out that the witness did say in her evidence-in-chief that she may not have used the exact words in relating what Sharima-Gopaul had told her.
De Nobrega disagreed with counsel’s suggestion that she had fabricated the story.
She agreed with him that it was she who had invited Sharima-Gopaul into her cell and that no police had placed her there, but strongly disagreed with his suggestion that she had extended such an invitation because she wanted to discuss the case.
“I invited her because she was my friend,” the witness said.
She also disagreed that she wanted to be seen with the accused, so that she could later say Sharima-Gopaul had told her things.
When asked by counsel, De Nobrega admitted that after she told police what she said her cellmate had related to her, the two had problems and were kept apart from each other at different female facilities.
She said whenever she was at the East La Penitence Police Station’s lock-ups, Sharima-Gopaul was taken to New Amsterdam prison and vice versa.
De Nobrega firmly disagreed with a suggestion from counsel that she ever asked his client for financial assistance to pay her bail. The woman argued that it was her mother who paid her more than $2 million bail.
Under re-examination by state counsel, the witness said she surrendered herself and also testified because she felt it was the right thing to do and not because she wanted to avoid her sentence.
When asked by state counsel, the witness also said that when she heard she was sentenced, she knew she would have to go to the New Amsterdam Prison and that meant being in the same institution with her former cellmate.
De Nobrega went on to say that she felt her life would be threatened because Sharima-Gopaul had a razorblade placed in her food at the New Amsterdam Prison after she had told police about the conversation they had.
Thomas finally suggested to the witness that she was making that story up, but De Nobrega told him the records will so prove that the accused had placed a razorblade in her food.
Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Denise Griffith-Jacobis was the final state witness to take the stand.
She recalled being stationed at the East La Penitence Station in 2010 as the officer-in-charge and that Sharima-Gopaul was being detained there, pending investigations into allegation of an alleged murder.
Griffith-Jacobis recalled being at home on October 10, 2010 where she received a telephone call from then ‘A’ Division Commander George Vyphuis which caused her to go to the East La Penitence Station.
She said that on arriving there, she received information of a security threat and as a result ensured that all the prisoners in the lock-ups were locked in their cells as it was reported that there was a plot for someone to escape.
This witness also testified that De Nobrega and Sharima-Gopaul had been separated from each other after October 20, 2010.
After the ASP’s testimony, the state announced that it had closed its case. The state had called 26 witnesses to the stand.
Meanwhile, the defence informed the court of its intentions to make submissions which will be heard on Monday.
Justice Singh explained to the jury that the closure of the prosecution’s case meant that it has no more witnesses to call and that submissions will be heard from the defence on Monday when the matter is called again.
He also reminded the jurors that they are not to come to any conclusion as to evidence they have heard so far, nor to discuss the case among themselves until such time as he gives them directions.
The judge also reminded them that no one is to approach them to discuss anything about the case since that constitutes an offence and that they are to report any such incident to him.
Sharima-Gopaul and Jarvis Small are accused of killing the 16-year-old between September 24, 2010, and October 2, 2010, at Madewini, Linden-Soesdyke Highway. The teen’s body had been stuffed into a suitcase, which was anchored in a creek at the Emerald Tower Resort with several dumbbells.
Small is represented by a team of four lawyers: Lyndon Amsterdam, Glenn Hanoman, Bernard De Santos SC, and Zanna Frank.
