Police were told that a suspect in the murder of Perry Puckerin had a firearm weeks before the fatal shooting, a Supreme Court jury heard yesterday.

Detective Inspector Michael Redfern, the senior investigating officer for the case since 2014, said the suspect, Tamasgan Furbert, was arrested and interviewed in 2010, but never charged with the murder.

He said: “There was no evidence.”

The officer added that not all information passed to police is supported by evidence.

Mr Redfern said: “Information comes in to our intel department. It’s looked at to see the source and see if it’s workable intelligence, to see if it’s something we can work with.

“Intelligence doesn’t mean fact.”

Prosecutors have alleged that Jeremiah Dill gunned down Mr Puckerin in the doorway of the Hamilton Parish Workman’s Club on January 3, 2010 amid a feud between two rival gangs.

Mr Redfern confirmed that police received information in December 2009 that Mr Furbert had obtained a firearm after he was attacked by several men in St George’s.

He also said the “information received” suggested Mr Furbert had fired the weapon in the Bailey’s Bay area and brought it to the Hamilton Parish Workman’s Club weeks before the fatal shooting.

He said: “It’s not unusual to have several suspects. It’s not unusual to arrest and interview those suspects.”

Mr Redfern added he did not know for a fact that Mr Furbert ever had or had shot a firearm.

The investigator confirmed another man, Sergio Robinson Woolridge, was also arrested in connection with the fatal shooting in 2010, but also never charged.

Mr Redfern said: “Again, there was no evidence.”

A witness, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said last week that gangland figure Prince Edness orchestrated the murder as part of a feud between the Parkside and 42 gangs, both based in Pembroke.

He said Mr Edness vowed the gang would “shoot the first guy they see” at the Hamilton Parish club and suggested the shooter could later hide in “the guy Tamasgan’s shed”.

The witness added that Mr Dill bragged about the shooting days later and demonstrated how he had shot Mr Puckerin.

Lawyers for Mr Dill accused the witness of making up a story to save himself from a prison sentence.

Mr Redfern told the court the witness was in custody for a shoplifting offence when he made his first statement about the shooting.

He also confirmed that records indicated the witness was not convicted of shoplifting, but he could not say why.

Mr Redfern said: “There are a number of things that could have happened.”

The trial continues.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. This is to prevent any statements being published that may jeopardise the outcome of that case.