Log In

Reset Password
BERMUDA | RSS PODCAST

Court told of alleged shooter’s movements

The trial of a man charged with opening fire on a group of people last year continued yesterday with the court hearing details about his actions before the shooting.

Princeton Burrows denies shooting four men outside Somerset Cricket Club on November 11 last year, along with charges of possessing a firearm and ammunition.

The court previously heard from the victims, who suffered injuries including fractured bones and nerve damage.

Prosecutors have alleged that another man, Germiko Williams, drove Mr Burrows to Somerset Laundromat and waited for him while he carried out the shooting.

Defence lawyer Marc Daniels, however, has suggested Mr Williams was the gunman.

A woman, who cannot be identified due to a reporting restriction, yesterday testified that Mr Williams and Mr Burrows had been at her home before the shooting.

She said that Mr Williams occasionally stayed at her home, despite a restraining order, and that he had spent the previous night there.

In the morning, they were visited by a female friend, with Mr Burrows arriving later on a black and green motorcycle which had clear tape near the handlebars.

She said that during the afternoon, she borrowed the bike briefly to collect a DVD player, and was aware that it was not licensed or insured.

The witness told the court that Mr Burrows and Mr Williams left the property together sometime at about 4.30pm.

She did not see them leave but believed they left on the bike which Mr Burrows had been riding.

She said that Mr Williams had been wearing a black shirt and red camouflage pants, while Mr Burrows was wearing navy blue pants and a grey or blue thermal top.

Later that evening she said she went with her female friend on a bus to Somerset because the friend did not want to travel alone. The witness remained on the bus until it returned, arriving back at her home in the early hours.

She testified that as she was travelling through the area, she noticed a number of flashing lights and a heavy police presence, which led her to call Mr Williams.

Early the next morning, she was asleep in her home and awoken by Mr Williams. She told the court he was wearing the same clothes he had on when she last saw him.

Under cross examination by defence lawyer Marc Daniels, the witness agreed she told police that, when Mr Williams woke her, she told him not to touch her with his “gunshot residue hands”.

She also agreed that, when she first saw the police presence, she immediately thought Mr Williams had been involved somehow.

Questioned about the men’s clothing, she accepted that Mr Burrows was wearing a black and white striped Newcastle United jersey on top of the thermal top, and that she had told police that Mr Williams was wearing green camouflage pants rather than red.

“I just assumed they were green, I’m guessing,” she said. “I got them mixed up.”

She also agreed that she told police that when Mr Williams woke her the morning after the shooting he was wearing different pants, specifically a pair of burgundy sweat pants which appeared to big for him.

The witness also accepted that she sent Mr Williams a text message on November 17, warning him that the police were looking for him and telling him to delete everything from his phone.

“That was when the police were at my house,” she said. “I didn’t know that he was already in police custody. They had him already.”

The court also heard evidence from a man who described himself as a former friend of Mr Williams.

He told the court that on the day of the shooting, Mr Williams and Mr Burrows both turned up at his house asking for an alcohol.

He was irritated by the surprise visit as he was on his way out, but took a bottle of Goldschläger from the kitchen and sent them on their way.

Under cross examination, he agreed that Mr Williams was the first one at the door, with Mr Burrows approaching a few seconds later.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. As we are legally liable for any slanderous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers.