Neesa Gopaul murder trial: Detective grilled over crime scene work

The trial into the murder of former Queen’s College student Neesa Lalita Gopaul continues at the High Court with yet another investigator taking the stand.

Police Corporal Floyd Hosannah from the Crime Scene Unit of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), Eve Leary, testified on Tuesday that he was among the party of policemen who went to the scene on October 2, 2010, where they found the teen’s body in a suitcase partially submerged in the creek at Emerald Tower Resort, Madewini Creek.

He noted that there was a rope holding the suitcase in place and Lance Corporal Germaine Laundry managed to cut the rope and pulled the bag to the bank of the creek where they opened it and found the body of a female. He recalled that the face was unrecognisable, but there were some documents in the suitcase, including a Guyana Passport made out to one “Neesa Gopaul”. He added that they took the body out of the bag as well as the items found, and placed them into evidence bags. He said the evidence was later marked and lodged for safe keeping.

The trial began last week against the teenager’s mother, Bibi Sharima Gopaul, and her former lover Jarvis Small, called “Barry”. The duo are indicted with the murder of the 16-year-old, which they allegedly committed between September 24 and October 2, 2010 at Madewini, Soesdyke- Linden Highway. State Counsel Diana Kaulesar is prosecuting the case along with Mercedes Thompson and Stacy Gooding. The teen’s mother is being represented by Attorney George Thomas while Small is represented by Attorneys Glenn Hanoman, Lyndon Amsterdam and Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos.

Omissions

Under cross-examination by Attorney Hanoman, the witness said that there were no signs at the scene that indicated that someone was recently there. The Attorney further asked Hosannah whether he had gone into any of the buildings nearby to investigate or had seen any of the other officers entering the buildings. He responded in the negative to both questions and acknowledged that he should have gone into the buildings.

Additionally, the witness claimed that he did not question persons around the area at the time since it was late in the night when Hanoman asked why he did not talk to persons living at the entrance to the trail leading to the creek. The officer explained that he was not sure whether persons were living there at the time and if he would have gotten any answer.

Nevertheless, when questioned by the Attorney if he was satisfied with the work done to process the scene before he left, the seasoned crime investigator said “to an extent”. In addition, the witness was asked whether he did anything specific to determine the identity of the remains since the face was unrecognisable and there was no way they could have known whether it was indeed the holder of the passport. He was specifically asked about taking fingerprints from the remains and looking for any other foreign prints that might have been left on the body, but the officer explained that the water damage removed any possibility of retrieving such evidence.

Hosannah went on to tell the court that he was told by investigators who returned to the scene two days later that a pair of dumbbells used as an anchor to hold the suitcase down was found. He related that he did not see the dumbbells until he was giving evidence at the Magistrate’s Court for the case.

The witness added that while at the scene on October 2 after they cut the rope from the suitcase, he pulled it but it did not move from under the water, so he let it go. Asked by the Attorney if he or any of the other officers tried to find what was holding the rope down, he replied in the negative. In response to questions posed about securing the scene, Hosannah disclosed that he cordoned off the area, noting that it was the first thing he did when he got there. He explained that the area where the suitcase was found could not be cordoned off because they were not sure how deep the water was at the time. The witness was then shown photos of the scene and asked to identify where the cordon tape was but could not do this. He explained to the court that the cordon tape covered a wide area and, therefore, could not be seen in the photos, most of which were close-ups of the scene.

Meanwhile, during cross-examination by Attorney Thomas, Hosannah admitted that he was unable to connect the evidence gathered at the scene to anyone specifically, more so, to the mother of the deceased. The Attorney further asked the witness whether he could have determined the race of the body found, to which he responded in the negative. The witness said that he was trained in handling decomposed bodies and could not determine how long the body was submerged in the water. The trial into the gruesome murder of the 16-year-old continues.