Jamaica Observer:-Three homosexual male prostitutes, two of whom claimed they were selling oral sex to a male client when he was robbed of his money and valuables in New Kingston caused quite a commotion at the Kingston, and St Andrew Parish Court last week after they were remanded.
The three accused reportedly attacked police on Friday while they were being led to the holding area and had cops scampering after they broke free. However, they were caught and placed inside the cell.
This was just after two of the men were scolded by Parish Judge Chester Crooks for shouting at a police corporal who they said was squeezing their handcuffs too tightly.
However, Judge Crooks, after hearing that they had attacked the police, gave instruction from them to be charged and taken to court next Tuesday.
Earlier the trio, who appeared on robbery with aggravation charges, pleaded guilty with explanation, They denied robbing the man of $10,000, his Blu cellular phone, and bag with clothing.
The court heard that on the night in question the complainant, who sells clothes, went to meet a lady in New Kingston to sell her some lighters. Sometime after, around 3:00 am, he was riding his bicycle on Trafalgar Road when he was reportedly pounced upon by a group of men, some dressed as women. Five of them, including one who had a knife, held him. He fell from his bicycle and was robbed of his goods by the men who fled.
The complainant reportedly chased them on his bicycle, crying and begging for the return of his goods. Eventually, a man told him where he could find the men, and he went to the police and reported the matter.
The police went to the location, held the men with the complainant’s phone, and took them into custody.
But Friday when they appeared in court they had a totally different story from the complainant’s.
The first accused told the court that he was on the road dressed in his female attire when he was approached by the complainant whom he told that it would cost him $2,000 for sex and $1,500 for oral sex.
“Him say him want a blow job [oral sex] and we went over the park and while I was doing it (the second accused) came by and him say him waa him fi give him a blow job too, and mi say ‘yu haffi pay mi first’ and him give mi $1,000,” the accused man said.
He said he then got a call from a client and left to do business and when he came back he saw the third accused and the man throwing stones at each other and he called a cab and went home.
The second accused told the court that he, too, had performed oral sex on the complainant but when he was finished the complainant did not want to pay him and he dipped into the complainant’s pocket and took out $1,000.
It was then that he claimed the complainant pulled a knife at him and the third accused came and took away the knife, while another man came and took away his phone and bag.
“We were having an altercation, stones were flinging and stones were flinging and we fled,” he said.
The other accused said he saw the complainant and the second accused in a dispute and went to intervene when he saw the complainant pull a knife.
The complainant’s phone was found in a room occupied by the third accused but he told the court that it was another homosexual living in the gully who gave him the phone to charge and he did not know that it had been stolen.
According to the first accused, the complainant knew that they were men.
“At first he was pretending like he didn’t know we were gays, but I was dressed in just a brassiere and skirt and my other friend did not have any top and he was sucking on his nipples,” he said.
The judge, after listening to their story which he said was far different from the prosecution’s version, told them that he was not going to offer them bail, as they did not have fixed addresses and it was in the public’s interest to keep them in custody.
He also told them that he would not accept their guilty pleas as they had presented a defence, saying it was someone else who had robbed the complainant.
The judge, however, indicated that while he had taken their story with a “fistful of salt”, he had to accept their version as a defence.
“It is either you are telling the truth or you are not,” he told them.
At the same time, he told them that he was aware of the usual practice by homosexuals when they are charged with robbery to try and smear the complainant’s image and to embarrass and traumatise them so that they do not return to court.
The complainant, who had been keenly listening to the accused men without appearing moved, raised his hand to say something but was told by the judge to put his hand down if he was thinking of dropping the case.
The complainant, who appeared upset at the men said: “Drop case? Every court date I will be here. I’m willing to leave my hustle and come here.”
The accused men will return to court next Tuesday in this matter where they will be assigned legal aid.