Too Cool freed of wounding charge as complainant’s story deemed ‘incredulous’

Popular DJ Too Cool Chris has been freed of the wounding charge in connection with his shooting of a man in Kingstown with his licensed firearm three times on July 4, 2024.

Senior Magistrate Tammika McKenzie upheld the radio personality’s self-defence case, ruling on Wednesday that there were many inconsistencies in the case presented by the prosecution.

In handing down her verdict at the Kingstown Magistrate’s Court, McKenzie said that the version of events presented by the complainant, Kevin Patterson, of Largo Height, was “incredulous”.

She said Patterson had attempted to distance himself from Heritage Square, where Too Cool, whose real name is Christopher Jones, had said Patterson had pelted him with bottles about 30 minutes before the shooting near Egmont and Bay streets in the area of Home Centre.

The magistrate noted the absence of CCTV footage as evidence in the case but acknowledged that the shooting had occurred four days after Hurricane Beryl had impacted St. Vincent and the Grenadines.

She further pointed out that the police had not obtained any statements from any witnesses at Heritage Square, where the incident leading to the shooting had begun.

The trial took place over nine months before ending on Sept. 29, when McKenzie reserved her verdict until Wednesday.

Before handing down her verdict, the senior magistrate spent over an hour summarising the evidence presented by both the prosecution and defence.

Principles of self-defence

She said she understood Jones’ case to be that he had acted in self-defence, hence it was the duty of the prosecution to disprove this.

She noted that in law, self-defence is not applicable where more force than necessary is used to stop an attack. The magistrate also pointed out that such a defence is not available to people who act in retaliation, adding that the prosecution seemed to have been suggesting that Jones had left Heritage Square to seek out Patterson.

She said that having examined the law on self-defence, the court had to determine whether it was necessary and reasonable for Jones to have acted as he had done and whether the force used was reasonable in the circumstances as he honestly believed it necessary to defend himself or another from an attack.

McKenzie said the court considered whether the force Jones used was proportionate and whether the threat was imminent.

She pointed out that Jones had no duty to retreat, noting that while retreating can be an option, it is not a necessary factor to determine whether a person acted in self-defence.

The court also considered what was operating on Jones’ mind at the time and whether a reasonable person would have acted as he had done.

She noted that Jones had testified that Patterson had pelted bottles at him at least four times and told him, “I’m going to kill you tonight” on several occasions on the night of the shooting.

After this, Patterson followed Jones as the defendant was on his way to the police station and came so close to him that he touched Jones as he passed.

“Was it reasonable for the defendant to ready his firearm to discharge at the complainant?” the magistrate asked.

She noted that the witness, Julian Richards, who was driving by just before the shooting took place and Police Constable 983 Jahshem Lynch, an off-duty police officer who was summoned by the defence, spoke about the area being well-lit such that Richards was able to see the black firearm in Jones’ hand.

McKenzie also noted that Patterson had said that he only noticed the firearm in Jones’ hand after he heard the first two shots ring out, at which point he realised that he had been shot.

No CCTV footage

The magistrate stated that CCTV footage would have aided in reaching a conclusion in the case.

“Along the entire Bay Street area, I was quite surprised that not a single camera anywhere along there or on the Back Street area, which is the route that the complainant said he walked to get to the Bonadie area, as he called it, that there was no footage obtained to help ascertain either side,” the magistrate said.

She, however, pointed out that Patterson had said that Jones had used the same route as him, while Jones and all the other witnesses said that they (Jones and Patterson) had taken the Bay Street route, rather than Back Street, as Patterson claimed.

The magistrate said the hurricane could have accounted for the absence of footage in the area.

She said that during the trial, there was much ado, both from Patterson and other witnesses, about having footage of the incident.

“None was adduced in this matter, save and except the digital images from the crime scene officer, which don’t help the time of the incident,” the magistrate said.

No evidence Patterson was shot from behind

McKenzie said she had no choice but to assess the evidence that was presented without much scientific assistance beyond the medical form.

She said it was “quite peculiar” that all of the injuries that Patterson sustained had the same circumference of 0.5 centimetres.

“So, there’s no way for me to know which are entry and exit wounds, as would traditionally be found in these gunshot injury cases.”

The court noted that the prosecutor had seemed to be indicating that there were injuries to Patterson’s back.

“I have no evidence of that,” the magistrate said, adding that the medical professional who assessed Patterson said his injuries were from the side or a frontal angle.

No independent witness to bottle pelting

The magistrate expressed disappointment that, in addition to the absence of CCTV footage, there was no independent evidence from anyone at Heritage Square, although a carnival activity was taking place there on the night of the shooting.

The only account of what transpired there came from Jones, who said that Patterson had pelted at least four bottles at him.

Patterson’s account ‘furthest away’ from other witnesses’ versions

She said the contention, therefore, was between the accounts given by Patterson, Richards, Lynch and Jones.

“The complainant’s account, when I assess all of the evidence, seems to be the furthest away from the others,” she said, noting that the other three witnesses testified about what transpired immediately around the incident.

“His seemed to be furthest away,” McKenzie said of Patterson. “He put himself walking from Peace MO coming down to Q-Care before he came to Bonadie,” she said, noting that Patterson said he arrived in Kingstown from Mesopotamia at  6:30 p.m.

“And by all accounts, from all of the witnesses in this case, that this incident happened sometime after 8 in the night. What transpired between 6:30 and 8:30, I do not wish to speculate, but I do note that he said he was not anywhere in Heritage Square,” McKenzie said.

She said Richards, Lynch and Jones all put Patterson on Bay Street, walking towards the downtown area.

McKenzie noted that Jones had said that Patterson threw at least four bottles at him in the space of 30 minutes and repeated threats over time, the last of which occurred on Bay Street moments before the shooting started.

Jones also said that he had left Heritage Square while he was playing music at Lano’s Bar, and he was heading to the police station to make a report.

Jones said he was walking under Penny Bank and Richards saw Jones walking along the area of Home Centre with a gun in his hand with a Rasta man walking behind him.

Lynch said more or less the same thing, corroborating Jones’s account, that Patterson was behind the defendant at some point and them moved ahead of him.

Paterson’s account ‘incredulous’

The magistrate pointed out that in his evidence, Patterson appeared to have made much effort to put distance between himself and Heritage Square, which is where Jones indicated that the incident started.

“… In like manner, he denied, vehemently, that he had any weapon on his person or on his knapsack and that he was ever treated at the Mental Health Centre, all of which were controverted by other fellow prosecution witnesses.

“So, in the final analysis, the court finds that the complainant’s account to be incredulous. His credibility is so shot that I am unable to accept his version of what happened. Taken as a whole, the prosecution’s account had too many variances at different aspects of the evidence provided by each witness.”

The magistrate said that despite this conclusion, she also considered the defence’s case.

“I accept that the complainant was fiddling with his bag, having threatened the defendant numerous times within 30 minutes, and even after being shot twice, he appeared to still have been adamant to make true his threats and pursued the defendant, who stated that he only felt that the threat was neutralised after the complainant was seated on the ground,” McKenzie said.

She said that given the law regarding self-defence and principles regarding lack of a need to be struck first, and the case law provided, she accepted the case as presented by the defence as not being excessive, hence the not guilty verdict.

Jones was represented by counsel Grant Connell while Station Sergeant of Police Shamrack Pierre was the prosecutor.

Patterson, who was present in court when the verdict was handed down, left as reporters were interviewing Jones outside the court. As he had done when he had left the court on a previous occasion, Patterson wore a facemask as he left on Wednesday.

Patterson was tried at the Calliaqua Magistrate Court with wounding Jones, but Magistrate John Ballah found him not guilty of the charge.