Shooting victim refuses to testify; accused gunman walks free
Oscar Usher
The second trial without jury was quickly disposed of this morning by Supreme Court Justice Herbert Lord. The prosecution’s main witness was nineteen year old Kenrick Longsworth, who was shot on October fourteenth, 2009. But today, Longsworth refused to testify against the accused gunman, twenty-five year old Oscar Kareem Usher, who was on trial for Attempted Murder. Senior Crown Counsel, Cecil Ramirez had to close his case within five minutes of the start of the trial because when Longsworth took the stand and was asked to tell the court what happened to him, he claimed that he didn’t remember anything. Ramirez asked if he had given a statement to police in 2009, but Longsworth said no and that he did not want to testify. With no further evidence against Usher, Justice Lord found him not guilty of attempted murder. Longsworth was only seventeen years old when he was shot three times as he walked near the corner of Victoria Street and Lovely Lane.
Another example of a dangerous criminal being released back into society, like a wolf among the lambs, because police lack the basic equipment to gather evidence. A voice recorder or video recorder would have provided undeniable proof of the victim’s original statement, and that should be enough to let a judge or jury decide what he said.
GOB is dangerously foolish in denying police such basic, modern crime-fighting equipment, while paying gangsters. That’s a crime all by itself!
Will the victim impose his own justice on the streets, or was he paid off or simply a coward? Tune in soon!
Very well said Storm. Video & voice recording of statements is a great idea. As a matter of fact the police department do have camcorder. They were using camcorder during riots & demonstrations in the past. But again, with the incompetence of the police department and DPP, that piece of valuable evidence will either be missing or misplaced.
change the !@#$%^& law. When something like that happens is no more longsworth against usher in the court, but GOB against usher