THE CROWDS arrived yesterday to find that a thick, 30ft tree had collapsed in high winds and the falling trunk had slammed against the courthouse, blocking the access door.
Nature’s intervention was probably going to be one of the least noteworthy things about a day at the criminal court in Port Louis.
Amid all the noise outside, it turned out, day five was all about silence.
Under questioning for much of the morning was a policeman, Hans Rouwin Seevathian, who took part in the investigation into Michaela McAreavey’s killing.
His role sounded plain and procedural to begin with: he had brought exhibits from one place to another after the killing, and that was the extent of his involvement.
But Sanjeev Teeluckdharry, the lead defence lawyer for one of the accused, wasn’t going to let him go that easily.
Seevathian is attached to the Major Crime Investigation Team (MCIT), the elite Mauritian police unit that led the inquiry.
Teeluckdharry had questions – lots of them. When did he arrive at Legends Hotel on the day of the killing? Whom did he meet?
How many officers were with accused number one, Avinash Treebhoowoon? An uneasy, drawn-out standoff ensued, each question from Teeluckdharry batted away with “I can’t remember” or “I can’t recall”.
The policeman, his arms folded against his thick-set frame, must have used these phrases 20 times.
“On what days did you escort the accused parties?”
“I can’t say, my lord.”
“Where was the accused when you and your team arrested him?”
“I can’t recollect exactly.”
“In which vehicle was accused number one brought to MCIT?”
“I can’t remember, my lord.”
Eventually the judge intervened. “Look, officer. This is an important case, yes? You arrested the accused, which was an important event, yes? . . . You will make an effort to remember.”
The defence homed in on a 2½-hour period between the time Treebhoowoon was arrested and the time his interrogation began at a nearby police station. Last week, of course, the court heard that Treebhoowoon alleged he was beaten by police.
“For 2½ hours, what have you been doing [sic] with accused number one?” asked Teeluckdharry.
Silence. The policeman stared ahead, saying nothing. It went so quiet you could hear pens scraping on paper in the public gallery.
After a few moments, the judge spoke up. “Let the record show that the witness remains silent to this question,” he said.
Extensive efforts have been undertaken to make the scene of the crime reveal its secrets through modern science, the court heard in the afternoon, but in important respects, it too has held its silence.
Susan Woodroffe, a forensic scientist from Cellmark Forensic Services in England, told the court she had found no DNA matches for the accused on Michaela’s body or a number of swabs taken from room 1025 by Mauritian police.
Witnesses over the past week have generally been met with aggressive, confrontational questioning by counsel.
Woodroffe got the gentlest grilling to date – she was thanked at one point, (a first), and asked if she would like to sit while giving evidence (another first). Perhaps it had something to do with the confident authority she exuded.
Woodroffe studied swabs from Michaela’s head and nails and from doorknobs, bathtub taps, wardrobe handles and a room keycard. She identified a potential match with Dassen Naraynen, another hotel employee, on the room’s key card.
Naraynen, the court heard last week, had a murder charge against him dropped and is facing a larceny charge in connection with the case in separate court proceedings. He is not listed to give evidence at the McAreavey trial.
Other than that, the DNA results sounded inconclusive. Woodroffe found unidentified genetic traces other than John and Michaela McAreavey on a number of samples, but in each case the components she found were too complex, weak or incomplete to give a meaningful profile.
And DNA samples, she added, could have washed off Michaela’s body when she was placed in the bathtub.
For now, room 1025 is refusing to give up its secrets.
