Randy Shallow, left, and Freikesha Douglas are being tried in connection with the guns and ammunition. (iWN photos)

The defence in the case in which a Lowmans Bay couple is charged with possession of a number of guns and ammunition, wants the police to provide a weapons expert to testify on their behalf.

The prosecution has already called a weapons expert in the person of Sergeant Julian Cain, who examined the weapons.

The defence cross examined that expert.

The defence should have begun presenting its case at the Serious Offences Court on Wednesday.

However, defence counsel Grant Connell told the court that the defence has encountered a hurdle to get an expert from overseas because of the cost of doing so.

He told Chief Magistrate Rechanne Browne-Matthias, who is presiding, that he has asked the Commissioner of Police to provide a weapons expert.

Connell further told the court that he has suggested that the police chief permit Corporal Gibson to appear on behalf of the defence or alternatively, a weapons expert who has retired from the Police Force.

Connell told the court that in light of these challenges, he was not ready proceed and asked for an adjournment.

The chief magistrate gave the defence until next Tuesday, May 2, to get its house in order.

The defence counsel further told the court that he must make it aware that the defence might seek its assistance in getting certain witnesses before the court.

iWitness News understands that Connell would also like to get to testify on behalf of the defence, one of the media workers who attended a press conference in January at which the weapons were displayed.

Lowmans Hill couple, Randy Shallow and Freikesha Douglas, are being tried for possession of three firearms, including a submachine gun (SMG), three magazines, and a number of rounds of ammunitions.

They were each charged that on Jan. 18, 2017 at Lowmans Hill, they:

  • had in their possession one Glock 9mm pistol without a licence;
  • had in their possession one .38 revolver without a licence;
  • had in their possession a prohibited weapon, to wit one submachine gun without a licence;
  • had in their possession a component of a prohibited weapon, to wit, a magazine of an AK-47;
  • had in their possession one round of 7.62 ammunition without a licence;
  • had in their possession one round of .38 ammunition without a licence;
  • had in their possession 42 rounds of 9mm ammunition without a licence;
  • and had in their possession 14 rounds of .40mm ammunition without a licence.

The Crown is alleging that police found the items at the couple’s home during a Jan. 18, 2017 raid.

Connell has argued that the firearms before the court are not the ones that police displayed at a Jan. 18 press conference, and are, therefore, not the ones that police claim they recovered during the raid.

The defence has been made to present its case after the court on April 3 rejected its no case submission.