THE prosecution delivered its closing arguments to the jury in the Neesa Gopaul murder trial before Justice Navindra Singh yesterday and contends that there is enough evidence for convictions.
Lead prosecutor, Diana Kaulesar told the court that what Jarvis Small had said was a “complete lie” and reflects an attempt to mislead the jury. She urged the jury not to fall for what Small had said in his defence about him being a family man and a father, since he is trying to deceive the court.
Kaulesar added that while he claimed to be a family man, yet he was accused of child molestation and wife beating.
QUESTIONABLE RELATIONSHIP
She recalled that the relationship with Bibi Gopaul and Small was “back and forth” (on and off).
According to her, if Gopaul was afraid of Small, as she claimed, then why did she follow him to a hotel in the first place and why did she go into the room with him.
The prosecutor disclosed that Gopaul was not in the room for five minutes, because the police went there and wrapped on the door for about ten minutes, after which Small opened the door and they were not properly dressed.
DID NOT RECOGNISE NEESA
The prosecutor questioned, “How can a mother not recognise her own daughter’s body”. She related that when Kayum (Neesa’s maternal grandfather) testified in court he said Bibi Gopaul said, “Ow meh Neesa” when she saw the teen’s body.
In addition to that, the prosecutor said Bibi Gopaul’s father testified that he never knew that his granddaughter would sleep out. She added that he seemed to be involved in their lives.
The prosecutor noted too that Kayum is second to the Imam at his mosque and is a strong believer of his customs. On that basis, she concluded that he is a principled man and questioned how Gopaul could ask him anything relating to digging up the grave of her late husband, who was interred according to Muslim rites.
She urged the jury to remember Kayum’s appearance in court when he gave his evidence.
DE NOBREGA’S INVOLVEMENT
She brought to the jury’s attention that Small never spoke about Simone De Nobrega in his unsworn statements, but yet his attorney spoke about it in their extensive closing address.
Prosecutor Kaulesar questioned who would have better access to the passport and bank cards of the teen other than her mother and questioned Gopaul’s explanation about this – something she failed to do.
In addition to the body, a passport bearing the name Neesa Lalita Gopaul had also been found.
The defence suggestion to De Nobrega was how much money she made from her false pretense charges was also addressed by the prosecutor.
She argued that if De Nobrega had all this money, then why she had to wait until her mother raised her bail, rather than posting it sooner.
Kaulesar questioned that if De Nobrega had struck a deal concerning her conviction, “why is she in prison right now”?
Gopaul told De Nobrega that Small had to go over to ensure her husband had died, which is how the witness got it in her story.
De Nobrega denied reading the story from newspaper. The prosecutor asked if the witness got her story from the newspapers, “Why she didn’t come and say they chop off the girl’s head”. Instead the witness said blows were inflicted to the teen’s head.
The prosecutor asked, “Don’t you think it will be alarming for a mother to come and relate a story like that?”
DUMBBELLS
She also brought the jury’s attention back to the infamous dumbbells, which were recovered from the crime scene.
Kaulesar related that Small said he took the dumbbells to Bibi Gopaul’s house for him to use and now he is running from the fact of ownership. She added that they are several witnesses to say that it belonged to the number one accused.
She highlighted that during cross-examination, the sequence of evidence does not matter and it is unaffected in the manner in which it is being told.
As it relates to pathologist, Dr. Nehaul Singh, he was deemed an expert to give evidence in the trial without any objection from the defence. The prosecutor said that this witness was able to come to the conclusion about the cause of death, as opposed to the defence claiming that the doctor’s evidence is inconsistent.
In De Nobrega witness testimony, she said that Barry hit Neesa at the back of her head. However, the prosecutor pointed out that De Nobrega did not say that Small continued to hit Neesa at the back of her head, instead she stated that “he” continued hitting her.
Tiwari, another witness, according to the prosecutor, in his evidence, never said that he was present in court when Gopaul testified in the assault matter against Small.
She said Neesa was alive when she received the injuries, she felt pain, as her mother was watching on.
HEARTLESS ACT
The prosecutor related that the post-mortem showed that the teen was alive when she sustained the injuries. These injuries were received by blows inflicted to her rather than any other means.
Kaulesar in her submission said that only a heartless mother can walk around to see if anyone was there and watch someone murder her child.
Both De Nobrega and Caesar spoke about Neesa and Smalls’ “compromising position” in their evidence, which the defence claimed conflicts.
The prosecutor explained that there is no reason to conclude that it is one incident both witnesses were relating to and surmised that when Gopaul saw Neesa in a comprising position with Small, she saw the teen as competition.
The prosecutor said that the accused Gopaul was inconsistent and could not keep her story straight. She added that during her unsworn statements, Bibi Gopaul appears to be crying but no tears were coming.
She asked the jury to consider Neesa’s reaction to the fact that her father died and two weeks later “another man walked” in.
The prosecutor urged the jury, “Think about how the teen would react to this situation.”
She said Neesa’s reaction resulted from her mother’s actions.
ENOUGH EVIDENCE
Kaulesar said there is enough evidence to convict the accused.
The prosecutor said, “The State is asking to find the two accused responsible for the cold blooded murder of Neesa Gopaul,” to accept if it is acceptable for a mother to murder her child.
This murder trial began approximately a month ago before Justice Singh and a mixed jury panel. The prosecution presented 26 witnesses before closing its case last Friday. On Monday last, the defence made a no-case submission which was overruled by the judge. However, both accused were called upon to lead their defence and both elected to do so by giving unsworn statements from the dock.
The case is being presented by State Prosecutors Diana Kaulesar, Mercedes Thompson and Stacy Gooding, who are contending that on October 2, 2010, the headless remains of a female had been discovered at a location along the Soesdkye-Linden Highway tucked inside a suitcase that had been partially submerged in a creek. A rope had been wrapped around the suitcase, and dumbbells had been attached at one end, apparently in an effort to keep the body under water.
The teenager was reported missing just days before the discovery had been made.
Subsequent to the gruesome discovery, Bibi Gopaul and her ex-paramour, Jarvis Barry Small, were arrested and charged for the murder.
Jarvis “Barry” Small is being represented by attorneys-at-law Glen Hanoman, Bernard Dos Santos SC, Lyndon Amsterdam and Zanna Frank; while Bibi Gopaul is being represented by Attorney-at-law George Thomas.
(By Geeta Rampersaud)