A data analyst was cross-examined in the Supreme Court about exchanges between four men on trial for the murder of Latrae Doeman.

Aaron Perinchief, Jukai Burgess, QuaZori Brangman and Nasaje Anderson have denied fatally shooting Mr Doeman in Flatts Village in the early hours of July 1, 2022.

The court previously heard that Mr Doeman was the pillion passenger on a motorcycle travelling from Bailey’s Bay Cricket Club when they were fired upon by the pillion passenger of a second motorcycle.

Mr Doeman was shot ten times and died as a result of his injuries.

All four defendants were arrested on the day of the shooting.

Earlier, the court heard evidence from Lauren Bell, an intelligence analyst for the Bermuda Police Service, providing details about phone communications between them.

As the trial continued yesterday, Jerome Lynch KC, counsel for Mr Perinchief, questioned Ms Bell about a video of Mr Doeman found on the defendant’s phone.

The video, recorded after the shooting but before police arrived on the scene, showed Mr Doeman slumped against a wall as a crowd looked on.

Ms Bell said that while phone records indicated that Mr Perinchief had sent the video to others, there was no evidence to explain how the recording came to be on his phone.

“I cannot say with any certainty where he has received that video,” she said.

“I’m not suggesting that he recorded it or didn’t, but in this chat he sent that message.

“I cannot say how he received it or who sent it to him.”

Ms Bell accepted that records indicated some messages had been sent to Mr Perinchief’s phone but that their contents were no longer on the device.

She also agreed to a suggestion by Mr Lynch that social media could be an “asset and a plague” for police investigating crimes.

Ms Bell indicated that Mr Perinchief’s phone had received a series of media notifications regarding the shooting on the morning of the attack but she could not say if or when he might have seen them.

Under cross-examination by Marc Daniels, counsel for Mr Anderson, Ms Bell confirmed that she did not see any record of communications between Mr Perinchief and Mr Anderson until after the shooting.

She also accepted that people can sometimes speak “at cross-purposes”, with the parties each having a different understanding about what was being discussed.

Mark Pettingill, counsel for Mr Burgess, questioned how Ms Bell came to the conclusion that the phone number she highlighted as linked to his client came to be associated with him.

Ms Bell said that while the phone was not registered in Mr Burgess’s name, it was registered to someone whom she understood to be his mother.

She also said that other phones seized in the case had the number saved as “Stacky”, which she understood was the defendant’s nickname.

“I have access to a system that says Stacky is the nickname of Mr Burgess,” she said. “I don’t know where they got that from.”

While Ms Bell maintained that a Snapchat account included in her reports was used by the defendant, she accepted that a Snapchat user could allow others to use the account to post or message.

She also accepted that none of the messages sent from the account made reference to planning a murder and nor did they mention the victim or any gang feud.

The trial continues.

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