cayCompass.com :: Ricketts rejects his signed interview
Compass
Search
Today's Date: 09 February 2012
Last Updated: 08 February 2012 14:07:43 CIT
CayCompass Community
Find us on Facebook
Ricketts rejects his signed interview
Says he was not involved in crime
By: Carol Winker | carol@cfp.ky
12 February 2010

Larry Prinston Ricketts took the stand on Wednesday and said under oath that he was not involved in the abduction, robbery, rape and murder of Estella Scott Roberts.

He told Chief Justice Anthony Smellie, attorneys and a gallery of almost 30 people, that he was not with co-accused Kirkland Henry on the night of 10 October, 2008.

That is the night friends last saw Estella as she walked to her car after a birthday dinner.

Henry has pleaded guilty to abduction, robbery and rape, but not guilty to murder. In his statements to police he said he did not kill Estella. He said Ricketts did it and then set her vehicle on fire with her body inside.

After Solicitor General Cheryll Richards QC closed the case for the prosecution, Henry’s attorney said he did not intend to call any evidence. Henry did not take the stand.

Robert Fortune QC then called Ricketts to give evidence. After answering questions from Mr. Fortune, the defendant was cross-examined by Ian Bourne QC on behalf of Henry, and by Ms Richards on behalf of the Crown.

Ricketts said he was born in Clarendon, Jamaica, and attended a vocational high school where he gained qualifications in maths, mechanical technology and technical drawing with two C grades and one B.

Now 27, Ricketts said he first came to Cayman in 2004, before Hurricane Ivan and was doing some landscaping. After the storm, he did landscaping, then washed cars at a rental place and then started doing construction.

He had different permits for different companies. He said he was obliged to go back to Jamaica, but returned to Cayman on 23 February 2008. The court has already heard that a work permit applicant for him was refused in September 2008 and he was allowed to stay until 30 October, 2008.

Meeting

Ricketts said he met Henry about 2006.

Ricketts told the court, he rode his bicycle to Royal Palms to have a few beers and chill out on the night of 10 October. He went alone; he had not arranged to meet Henry. He arrived around 8pm or five after. He did not meet anybody he knew. He left around 10pm and got home around 10.30pm.

Around 2am he received a call from Henry that lasted seven seconds, according to phone records. Ricketts said he was asleep and didn’t know who was calling until he saw his phone screen when he woke up at 5.30am.

He left for work at 5.50am and rode his bicycle to town, where he would get a bus to West Bay. He said he saw Henry near the post office. Henry told him he had found a credit card and asked if Ricketts could assist him with it because Henry didn’t know how to use an ATM machine.

Ricketts said he told Henry he would assist and they went to Bay Shore Mall where Ricketts tried to use the card but did not succeed. They then went to Cayman National Bank on Elgin Avenue. Henry gave him a piece of paper with a number on it, but it did not work.

Mr. Fortune asked if Ricketts wondered whether Henry had any right to use the card, or was he stealing. Ricketts replied, “At the time I was just giving him some assistance. I never really think about his right.” The card was used between 6.29-6.31am and all attempts failed.

Ricketts said he gave the card and paper back to Henry. They were together about a half hour. Then Ricketts took a bus and went to work at a construction site in Northwest Point, arriving minutes to 8am.

Computer and phone

Phone records showed that Henry called Ricketts three times between 8 and 8.10am. Ricketts said Henry was asking how to access a laptop.

Henry phoned him two more times that day, but Ricketts did not remember what it was about. He said he worked until 1pm and went to town for a shave. Coming from the barber he saw Henry, who said the computer was not working. Ricketts walked to Henry’s house and showed him how to access the computer.

They talked and Henry told him he had found two Blackberry phones. Henry asked if Ricketts wanted to buy one for $300. Ricketts said he couldn’t pay $300 because the battery was dying and he didn’t know if it would work. So he paid him $200.

Ricketts acknowledged being arrested on 27 October. He was detained overnight and spoken to the next day by Inspector Donovan Bailey. He said Mr. Bailey did not tell him anything about his right to have a lawyer.

Mr. Fortune pointed out that Ricketts’ interview contained what – if true – amounted to admissions of taking part in the abduction and murder of Estella Scott Roberts. The interview had Ricketts’ signature at the bottom of each page.

Ricketts admitted signing and initialling the interview. But he said he had been told he was just assisting police with their inquiry and the interview was a police procedure they were following. He said he was told if he agreed with what was in the interview it would show he was not lying, he was cooperating.

Last week, the Chief Justice held a special hearing to determine whether Ricketts’ interview should be admitted into evidence. On Monday he concluded that it should.

The judge pointed out that the ultimate test was fairness. In the special hearing, Ricketts had maintained that what was written in the interview was contrived by the officers. Further, implausible though it seemed, Ricketts alleged that Mr. Bailey told him, “If I agreed, he would probably let me go and not charge me.”

The judge pointed out that by the time the interview took place, Ricketts had been advised several times of his right to an attorney. When Ricketts testified, it was clear he was intelligent – he must have been aware of the consequences of his statement.

Finally, when a representative of the Jamaican Consulate visited him, he did not complain about not having an attorney. Surely that would have been one person he could have trusted, the judge said.

Before Ricketts’ evidence concluded on Wednesday, his attorney asked for an exhibit to be allowed into evidence. It was an unopened Durex condom found at Ricketts’ residence. Mr. Fortune said the point was that it was a different type of Durex condom from what had been found at the alleged scene of the rape. That condom contained DNA that linked Henry and Estella.

Ms Richards was still questioning Ricketts when court resumed Thursday.

 
Share your Comment
We welcome your comments on our stories. Comments are submitted for possible publication on the condition that they may be edited.
IMPORTANT IDENTITY INFORMATION: You will be able to create a ‘nickname’ which will allow you to remain anonymous, however, whilst we collect login information from you, this information will be kept confidential and only used to contact you directly, if required. We require a working email address - not for publication, but for verification.
Please login to comment on our stories.    Log In | Register
 
 
Copyright © 2012 Cayman Free Press Ltd. All Rights Reserved.