Kevin Nixon

His name is Pleasant Brodnax, and he presented a pleasant case to the Washington jury on behalf of Kevin Nixon. Brodnax is a Washington attorney, and he represented Nixon, one of the seven Trinidadians charged with taking US citizen Balram “Balo” Maharaj hostage.

Nixon, 32, was found guilty along with the others and will be sentenced on February 12 next year by Judge John Bates. Brodnax was the last of the lawyers to make an opening statement to the jury. He said: “Kevin is the father of three children, one daughter who he hasn’t even seen yet because of his incarceration in this case. The only evidence in this case against Kevin Nixon will be from co-operating witnesses, the people who have admitted they have actually perpetrated this crime. “I anticipate that the judge will tell you in instructions that these type of witnesses have to be viewed by you, not as an ordinary witness, but looked at someone with greater care and scrutiny.

“The government alleges that Mr Nixon is one of the gunmen who went into the Samaan Tree Bar and abducted Balo in April of 2005. This was around 6.30 in the evening, happy hour, sort of. A lot of people there, a nice bar, a lot of people attended the bar. “But as Mr (Patrick) Donahue said, nobody from that Samaan Tree Bar is going to come in here and say—See that man over there in the blue shirt sitting next to Mr Brodnax—that’s the man who abducted somebody out of that bar. And the physical description that they gave of the abductors will not match Mr Nixon as well.” Brodnax added: “These are the people who we have all referred to as civilian witnesses, people with no stake in the outcome of this case. These witnesses don’t have plea agreements that require them to tell the truth, to buy into the government’s theory in order to get out of jail for the rest of their lives. These are impartial witnesses.

“When Kevin Nixon was sought for questioning in this case, what did he do? He called the police, turned himself in, submitted to their questioning for as long as they wanted to question him. There’s going to be no confession, alleged confession or statement that the government is going to try to use against Mr Nixon in this case. Why did he do that? “Because he has asserted his innocence in this case from the very beginning. The government claims that these men trusted each other. The government wants you to believe that they trusted each other because they participated in kidnappings and other crimes, both before and after the offence conduct in this case. “Well, you won’t hear any of that involving Mr Nixon. The other crimes...evidence that the government wants to offer against certain people in this case is not admissible against Mr Nixon, doesn’t have anything to do with Mr Nixon, and you cannot hold it against him. Mr Nixon is the only defendant in this case, and involved in this trial, and involved in the whole case, who is from an area in Trinidad called Upper Santa Cruz.

“He’s the only person here from Upper Santa Cruz. None of the other co-defendants are from Santa Cruz, none of the co-operating witnesses will be from Santa Cruz. He’s from a neighbourhood where the other people are from different neighbourhoods, and they don’t get along. “There will be no reason, I submit to you, the evidence will show, that Mr Nixon participated with anybody to do anything. He’s not from the same neighbourhood, and he doesn’t know these people. The people who started talking about him in the beginning in Trinidad didn’t even know his name. They didn’t know his real name. They just heard of a guy named Shaka, and that’s what they used.” Brodnax concluded: “The judge told you in the preliminary instructions, and I’m sure he’ll tell you again, like other counsel have indicated, that we really do have seven little trials here, seven mini-trials. “And I believe, ladies and gentlemen, once you hear the evidence that the government is going to offer against Kevin Nixon to try to show his involvement in this conspiracy, I’m sure that when we come back, you will be able to return verdicts, on both of these counts, of not guilty.”