A police officer was questioned in the Supreme Court about the possible transfer of gunshot residue onto a man accused of murder.

Pc Che Young, who arrested Kiari Tucker on November 4, 2017, told the court that he had taken steps to mitigate the possible transfer of GSR onto the defendant and that he did not make contact with the palms of Mr Tucker’s hands while handcuffing him.

Mr Tucker, 27, has denied the November 3, 2017, murder of Morlan Steede, 35, along with the use of a firearm to commit an indictable offence.

CCTV footage played during the trial showed a man in a white shirt running down One Way Deepdale followed by a person in all black at about 9.40pm.

As they ran, flashes of light were seen to come from the outstretched arm of the person in black.

The two men turned on to Two Way Deepdale and then on to Parsons Road, where they disappeared from view.

Mr Young told the court this week that he was on mobile patrol with the Armed Response Unit when he was dispatched to the area at 9.42pm.

When they arrived at the junction of Two Way Deepdale and Parsons Road, he said he saw a crowd of people and an off-duty police officer performing CPR on a man on the ground.

Mr Young said he later found several shell casings in the area.

He told the court that the next day he and other officers were sent to Mr Tucker’s last known address in Warwick, where he found the defendant hidden under clothing in a bedroom closet and handcuffed him.

As the trial continued yesterday, Mr Young accepted that he did not tell the court that he had left the police car at Deepdale during an earlier hearing.

However, he denied that the omission was a deliberate effort intended to bolster gunshot residue evidence, and said that he had not recalled it while on the stand.

While Charles Richardson, for Mr Tucker, said it “beggars belief” that Mr Young forgot that he was on One Way Deepdale, the officer maintained that he remembered it only after reviewing his notes and CCTV footage which showed him in the area.

Mr Young was also questioned about the arrest of Mr Tucker, stating that he did not recall exactly how many officers were involved in the search of the defendant’s apartment, but estimated that there were six of seven.

He accepted that while it was ideal for non-armed officers to make arrests in firearms cases to prevent potential transfer of gunshot residue, it was not feasible in this case.

While Mr Young said Mr Tucker did not resist, he said: “At any point he could decide to run or do whatever.

“Whether he is fighting or not we want to secure him as best as possible so he doesn’t flee or decide to fight or reach for a firearm that we suspected he might have.”

He told the court that when he handcuffed Mr Tucker, he did so by grabbing his forearm rather than his hand to reduce the risk of GSR transfer, but accepted that Mr Tucker’s palms would have been facing outward.

Mr Richardson also questioned Mr Young about a past conviction for driving an unlicensed vehicle which took place while he was a police officer.

Mr Young said it was the “wrong thing to do” but told the court that there were extenuating circumstances behind the incident.

He later explained that he had borrowed the motorcycle from a friend and was unaware that the vehicle was not licensed.

The trial continues.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. This is to prevent any statements being published that may jeopardise the outcome of that case