On the 14th of January last year, Miss Lois McMillen lost her life. She was forced in the late hours of that night, that Friday night, to flee from her motor vehicle in the West End area just a few hundred yards away from the West End Police Station.

There was a struggle; she was met and cut with a knife. She suffered a beating and then she was violently drowned.

Along that shore, you may all know, there is not relatively any beach, a few bits of rocks and boulders on that shore that is called the Sir Francis Drake Channel where she drowned.

Next morning, the police went to the Zebra House in Belmont, Tortola, a house occupied by these accused men. They had been with her on previous nights in that vicinity. When the police went to the house, they saw wet and sandy shoes. You shall hear that the sand under one of those pairs of shoes matches the sand at the place where the body of Miss McMillen was found.

They were asked to explain wh their shoes were wet and sand and Mr. George and Mr. Spicer said they were wet and sandy because we were walking along the beach at Cane Garden Bay at Quitos [Restaurant].

You shall hear that there was no sand under those shoes from Cane Garden Bay. And from Mr. Spicer's shoe was found the sand from the scene where this crime was committed.

You shall also hear from witnesses about things said by these accused men while in custody. And I would ask you to listen carefully to the evidence as these are the facets of this case that we shall present on one hand, evidence of circumstances and consequences. These men were in the area at the same time, about the same time when this woman lost her life.

On the shirt of Mr. Spicer was a spot of blood ... [Note: an objection was launched at this point and the issue was ultimately dropped at the suggest of Justice Kenneth Benjamin].

It is our duty on this side to fairly present the case on behalf of the Crown and the people of the British Virgin Islands, not on one side or the other, to try and put the evidence before you fairly and as accurately as we can ... You sit here, nine good men and women of this territory, as the jurors of facts, the ones who are going to, in the long run, decide the facts of this case.

Now, we have nine jurors because it is not intended that it is going to be the verdict of one. it must be the combined effort of the nine of you to deliberate over these facts and come to a verdict.

This case is based first of all on circumstantial evidence, and circumstantial evidence is sometimes looked at even stronger than evidence from an eyewitness, even than evidence of confession, because it is pieces of evidence when you twine them together, they present a strong case ... We also in this case will be bringing evidence of words said by the men which we are saying shows their involvement in the crime. And there is a witness or two who we shall call on that point.

Now, I would tell you, we on this side don't appear for any of the parties. So I would tell you that one of the witnesses that we would call has a bad history. We don't hide that he has a bad history. He was in prison and because he was in the prison was why he heard what he heard. But in the long run, you are going to have to ask yourselves, can you believe him when he says what he says. And when he comes, I ask you to judge him like any witness, bearing in mind his past, of course, and say whether or not you believe him.

Madame Foreman and members of the jury, I ask for your continued patience and your continued diligence in listening to the evidence that we shall call in this case and at the end of it, if you feel sure that the case is made out against these men you may bring in a verdict of guilty.

If you do not feel sure, then, of course, for any of them, then, of course, you bring in a verdict of not guilty.