The trial into the abduction and killing of Nigel Christian moved into its final phase on Wednesday, with closing arguments completed and the case now set to be handed to the jury.

Four closing speeches were delivered—one by the prosecution and one from each of the three defence attorneys—underscoring the complexity of the case and the sharply contested interpretations of the evidence presented over the course of the trial.

Lead prosecutor Clement Joseph urged jurors to place confidence in what he described as the core of the Crown’s case: the testimony of a key witness who said he transported the accused men on the day Christian was abducted and killed.

Joseph argued that this account is supported by technical evidence, including cellular data and call records, which he said demonstrate movement, timing and coordination consistent with the witness’s version of events. He also rejected suggestions from the defence that evidence may have been planted, telling the court there is no credible proof to support such claims.

Defence attorneys, however, mounted a unified challenge centred on the credibility of that same witness, arguing that the prosecution’s case depends too heavily on a single account.

Attorney for Saleim Harrigan pointed to inconsistencies in the witness’s statements and questioned possible motives, seeking to raise doubts about reliability. Counsel for Lasean Bully focused on what he described as gaps in the prosecution’s case, arguing that unanswered questions fall short of the legal threshold required for a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.

Meanwhile, the attorney representing Thomas challenged the integrity of the investigative process itself, questioning whether the way evidence was gathered and linked to the accused could be relied upon.

With closing submissions complete, attention now turns to Justice Rajiv Persaud, who is expected to deliver his summation to the jury. His directions will outline how jurors should interpret the law, assess the evidence and apply the standard of reasonable doubt.

The case will then be placed in the hands of the jury, who must determine whether the prosecution has proven its case to the required legal standard.

Deliberations are expected to begin on Monday, April 27.