Police chief not backward in coming forward against Legends

From the outset, it was clear the police witness was not going to be backward in coming forward.

Some officers have been less than expansive while testifying at the Michaela McAreavey trial; not assistant commissioner of police Yoosoof Soopun.

“Contain yourself,” Judge Prithviraj Fecknah urged as he struggled to keep pace with one of the police chief’s expositions.

“I feel there is an excitement building in you.”

The testimony was marked not by a reluctance to give extensive answers, but by a reluctance to be halted while doing so.

Time and again, Mr Soopun launched into lengthy supplementary points to questions to which officers that went before him into the witness box may have answered yes or no.

It was clear the top brass at the Legends Hotel were in his sights. On at least four occasions, he digressed to lambaste its management for allegedly not co-operating with police during their inquiries.

Their failure to provide detectives with electronic readings of entries to room 1025 led to them wrongly suspecting and arresting “poor” John McAreavey, he claimed.

Later he described Ms McAreavey as the “poor” deceased lady.

The judge did not challenge his evidence, but did question his adjectives.

“You are before a jury. I would remind you to refrain from using emotive language,” he warned.

“You have done it before in relation to John McAreavey — the poor person John McAreavey, now the poor deceased.

“What are you doing here? You will not try to influence the jury one way or the other with this emotive language.”

Mr Soopun apologised, but did not temper his desire to elaborate.

His multiple efforts to characterise his officers as “experienced” was also met with a judicial admonishment. “We are all aware of the experience of your officers,” chided Justice Fecknah. “There is no reason to repeat that.”

As one of the diners at the now infamous takeaway meal in the offices of the major crime investigation team two days after Ms McAreavey’s murder, it was only a matter of time before Mr Soopun got on to fried rice.

A lot of court attention has already been focused on the claims of another MCIT officer that former defence lawyer Ravi Rutnah shared his portion of the fast food dish when he arrived late for a consultation with defendant Avinash Treebhoowon.

Mr Rutnah dramatically withdrew from the case two weeks ago after insisting inspector Luciano Gerard’s claims amounted to a slight on his reputation.

The barrister will return as a defence witness to give his own account.

Yesterday, Mr Soopun gave his.

“We normally had a special dinner when we worked late and we worked until late on the 12th [Jan 2011],” he explained to chief prosecutor Mehdi Manrakhan.

The officer went on to claim Mr Rutnah arrived there around an hour late and went for a meeting with Mr Treebhoowon to discuss the suspect’s alleged stated intention to confess all.

Mr Soopun said the lawyer emerged with his client, indicating that the hotel worker was tired and would make a statement the next day.

The officer said that, at that point, the food was still on the go.

“Then we invited them to share our meal,” he said. “They said they would be delighted and accepted our invitation.

“Our meal was fried rice, my lord. Mr Gerard doesn’t like to eat fried rice. Mr Rutnah made a request if he can be given the share of Mr Gerard’s fried rice and he was happy with it.”

The court will not have to wait much longer to hear from Mr Rutnah whether his appetite is as voracious as the police contend.