?Patrick Donahue made no bones about it. In his opening address to the Washington, DC, jury, Donahue said his client Christopher Sealey was never identified as one of the men who snatched Balram "Balo" Maharaj from the Samaan Tree Bar in Aranquez on April 6, 2005. As far as he was concerned, his client was innocent of the charges, that he and other Trinidadians took Maharaj hostage, and when he died on their hands, they dismembered the body. Donahue added, "I must admit that when I first read the charges, I was amazed. I actually had go to a world atlas to fully understand the charges against my client and put it into context. Several thousand miles away and 70 miles off the coast of Venezuela (sic) is where this nightmare begins for my client. August 8, 2006, almost a year and a half after the victim in this case disappeared, police arrested my client at five in the morning at his aunt's home, where he had grown up.
"It was on that date, August 8th, 2006, that my client was informed that it was the Trinidadian police position that he had been involved in this kidnapping and murder. "You will learn and the evidence will show, ladies and gentlemen, that he's 37 years old, that he was born on the island of Trinidad, that he grew up on the island of Trinidad, and that he never before left the island of Trinidad until this nightmare brought him here, thousands of miles from home. "The Trinidadian police force say he's involved. It's not true. I want to go over with you what the evidence will show. And you've heard a lot of evidence this morning, ladies and gentlemen, or what the prediction of evidence will be. But I want to be very, very emphatic about this. You have not heard a flick of evidence yet. What you have heard is government theory. You've heard Trinidadian government theory, and you have heard these prosecutors' theory. But you have not heard any evidence."
Donahue continued, "My client stands before you absolutely innocent of anything right now. That's not easy to do. If he is viewed by you right now anything other than innocent, you're breaching that mandate. "I know easier said than done, but Mr Sealey is entitled to have your consideration of the evidence as against him as if he's here alone. It's not an easy request, one in seven trials going on all at the same time. Not easy. But nonetheless, your obligation, one that you have to fulfil. "It is not what the Trinidadian government said, not what the co-operating witnesses told the Trinidadian government, but in this courtroom, they have to prove to your satisfaction that Mr Sealey is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I suggest to you that the evidence is going to show, ladies and gentlemen, they can't do that. The evidence is going to show Mr Sealey was never involved in any conspiracy to take this victim.
"The evidence is, the Trinidadian authorities say he was; the evidence is, he wasn't. So what is the evidence going to show? Well, the evidence is going to show, ladies and gentlemen, that he wasn't arrested until 18 months after the victim in this case disappeared. The evidence is going to show there is virtually no forensic evidence or physical evidence against Mr Sealey, zero. The evidence will show, that the eyewitnesses, the neutral eyewitnesses, people without motive to lie, people that aren't trying to get out of jail, people who were at the Samaan Tree Bar that night, those neutral eyewitnesses, they don't identify Mr Sealey as the one who came in and snatched this victim. "Those eyewitnesses will describe the person who did the snatching, the kidnapping, as a tall man, as a stocky, muscular man with a Rasta hat and Rasta hair. That is not Mr Sealey. And those are the neutral eyewitnesses. Ladies and gentlemen, it will be for you to assess what kind of pressure the Trinidadian authorities were under to name names, to solve this crime, to accept representations of people like Jason Percival."
Donahue told the jury, "You will learn that there is no evidence that Mr Sealey was involved in the planning of this scheme. And there's no evidence that he was seen on the mountain with the victim, or that he did anything regarding the death of the victim or the burying of the victim. There's no evidence. In fact, you're not going to hear any evidence that he was involved in any of these so-called other crimes that the government...the other kidnappings that the government has described. "Mr Sealey isn't involved in any of that. And you listen to all that evidence, and I will tell you, you will find he wasn't involved. "You're not going to hear evidence that Mr Sealey is friends with all these gentlemen, but I will tell you that while he may not be their friends, he's not their foe, either. For all he knows, they aren't involved in this either.
"So why are we here? Well, we're here because the Trinidadian authorities had a theory, and their theory was based on the co-operators. Those co-operators will testify. I leave it to you to listen and scrutinise carefully the testimony of those individuals. Because I suggest, as many counsel have, and very rightly so, it is suspect testimony. "You will hear from Trinidadian constables, some credible but some not so terribly credible. And you need to listen to them, because I have no doubt the government will march out this alleged Sealey statement, this alleged confession, a confession not videotaped, not audiotaped, a confession written out by Trinidadian police. And I implore you to examine that testimony carefully," he ended.
?TOMORROW: The final defendant talks
