Court transfixed during 25-minute dramatic soliloquy

The clock showed it was nearing 25 minutes since anyone else had spoken.

Sanjeev Teeluckdharry had been standing poised throughout, defence counsel ready to put another question to his client when a suitable juncture arrived.

But Avinash Treebhoowon just kept going.

The defendant had already been testifying for over three hours when at 2.20pm, his counsel asked what happened inside the offices of the major crime investigation team (MCIT) the day he was arrested for Michaela McAreavey’s murder.

It was close to 2.45pm when his answer finally concluded.

In between, the court fell quiet as the accused levelled claim after claim against the police.

Some jurors looked transfixed, heads cupped in hands as they leant forward on the benches of courtroom five.

It was not the pose of Michaela McAreavey’s widower John, who left briefly for a period midway through, along with brother-in-law, Mark Harte.

Mr Treebhoowon stood at an angle in the witness box, directly facing Mr Justice Prithviraj Fecknah as he gave his evidence.

But at times it appeared as if he was delivering a soliloquy, addressing no one in particular.

If it was rehearsed, it was well rehearsed, for he did not pause or stumble once as he outlined his alleged treatment at the hands of the officers.

As he recounted claims of threats, beatings and torture inside the kitchen at the back of the MCIT building at Line Barracks in Port Louis, his voice remained clear and unwavering. It only faltered at the end of his day in the witness box when he spoke of his wife Reshma, who was waiting outside court, and the rest of his family.

He started crying and produced a dazzling white handkerchief from his pocket to dab at his eyes.

The man who denies the Ballygawley teacher’s murder then crumpled over the mike, his head slumped into his hands.

“I was thinking about my family,” he said, recalling his first night in custody.

He then dropped his hankie, apparently overwrought with emotion. Whether it was an accident or for dramatic effect, the jury will decide.

His co-accused Sandip Mooneea watched impassively only yards away below him in the dock.

If Mr Treebhoowon’s looked assured when making allegations of police brutality, he did not appear so sure-footed earlier in the morning when asked about timings on the day of the murder.

Mr Teeluckdharry had been asking him when he cleaned certain rooms, but seemingly not content with some of his responses, the lawyer tried to pose questions again.

The tactic provoked an angry response from prosecutor Mehdi Manrakhan.

The judge urged Mr Teeluckdharry to amend his approach.

“The objections coming from state are because the questions are not being put in a clear enough manner,” he explained.

But Mr Manrakhan was not to remain seated for long. Again and again he rose to object.

Eventually, Mr Teeluckdharry erupted.

“I think my friend must allow me leeway to examine my client. This is most ill mannered from my friend.”

The judge stepped in before things escalated, warning both lawyers, starting with the defence: “I would remind you what are the rules of examination in chief.

“You are not supposed to suggest or put words in the mouth of witnesses — you ask questions and the witness answers questions.”

Mr Justice Fecknah then turned to the prosecutor.

“We are going to maintain order as these proceedings are going on,” he said sternly.

“This is an accused party, the state wants to make sure that nothing amiss happens, but we are still going to make sure things are done in a gentlemanly way.”

Further shows of “excess emotion” would not be permitted, he said.

Pistols may have been about to be drawn in a figurative sense, but at the start of the day’s proceedings there was a reference to guns that was all too literal.

“I have been informed that an escorting officer with a firearm is in the court,” said the judge as he took his seat. “This case has been going on for five weeks, there has been no need to insert any firearms in court so far.

“So you may go outside and perform security if you so wish but there’s no need for you to be in court with a firearm.”

At that, a somewhat sheepish looking officer walked out, taking a very large gun with him.