Murder accused Glentiste Baptiste to know his fate this week

Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (acting) Sherma Dalrymple has urged the nine-member mixed jury of four (4) men and five (5) women to use their “common sense and daily life experiences” in dealing with the evidence in the matter involving Glentiste Baptiste.
Glentiste Baptiste is charged with the murder of his uncle Parmer Phillip Blesuget of Wesley between December 21, 2018 and January 3, 2019. The prosecution is alleging that Baptiste used a piece of block to hit his uncle in the head resulting in his death 13 days later at the Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH).
Cuban pathologist Dr. Idelmys Alarcon who performed the autopsy on the body of the deceased told the court that he died because of hemorrhaging (bleeding) which decreased the volume of blood in his body causing his death.
In his brief statement from the prisoner’s dock, the accused told the court, “I told the Inspector is my uncle that threatened me. He then ran to his house and told me he was coming back. I took a stone and send it and it hit him on the side.”
The defense then called Ear Nose & Throat (ENT) specialist Dr. Irving Pascal who after reviewing his credentials the court deemed an “expert in head and neck” testified that the lacerations indicated by the pathologist Dr. Alarcon in her report indicated “minimum trauma to the head and were superficial.”
Dr. Pascal was in court when the pathologist was giving her testimony.
In my opinion, these lacerations are superficial, the skull is intact with no fractures and no penetrating or blunt injury to the brain. No blood clots, no adhesion, or pus in the brain were noted. These are all signs of major trauma, their absence within the head of the deceased indicates no significant brain injuries,” he told the court.
According to him, in his opinion, there is no deleterious effect on the brain that could have spread to the rest of the body. “None of these superficial head injuries would or could have the effect of causing bleeding in the abdomen or other system abnormalities,” he stated.
“In my opinion, she (the pathologist) failed to establish the link between such unspecified preexisting conditions and the minimum trauma to the head and the impact of the injuries specified on the head would be limited to the surface of the head given the minimal and superficial nature of the injuries,” Dr. Pascal told the court.
But in her address to the jury, the DPP explained to them that they were to determine what the facts were in the case. “You run things…your tool is common sense, you are not to speculate, have no emotions, and don’t be sympathetic to no one,” she said.
“Our burden is always heavy to prove our case and we have carried out that load throughout the trial, the evidence is clear that the accused (Baptiste) caused the death of his uncle.”
She attacked the expert evidence of the defense Dr. Irving Pascal calling it “inaccurate.”
“Dr. Pascal is not a pathologist and comes and says to you the head injuries sustained by the deceased are superficial. He did not see the patient, he did not see the CT scan nor did he witness the autopsy, the pathologist told you that the skull was exposed but Dr. Pascal calls that injury superficial,” she stated.
She told them that the accused is also raising a case of “self-defense, accident and provocation” and he acted first. “He was not in danger, no fight, no interaction so where is the self-defense, we are saying no accident, he struck the deceased and claims it was an accident because he the deceased fell and hit his head, we have shattered all of that, what we have is murder and we have brought your several witnesses to so prove,” Dalrymple said.
She said that there was a “feud between the deceased and his uncle” resulting in his striking the deceased with the piece of block.
But in response, defense counsel David Bruney told the jury that the matter is “about emotions” a family situation involving a Will. “Put your shoes in his feet, facts are stubborn things, you heard the pathologist, she destroyed her notes which were critical to the defense,” Bruney remarked.
The notes of the pathologist he told the jury would have pieced the puzzle together as to what transpired during the autopsy. “Remove emotions…are your robots, this is a family fighting for land?” he asked the jury. “It’s a family dispute and it went out of hand, the accused told you he struck the deceased on his waist, its clear that he fell and hit his head, none of the injuries sustained are consistent with the block used,” Bruney stated.
He called Dr. Irving Pascal a “credible witness” stating, Dr. Pascal is the only credible witness that you have do not convict this 18-year-old boy on this suspect report from the pathologist.”
It is now the turn of presiding High Court Judge Richard Floyd to summarize the evidence to the jury, address them of the State’s case and that of the defense, and also on the law before asking the jury to retire to consider their verdict.