THERE is nothing in the evidence advanced by the prosecution against one of the men charged with the murder of six-year-old Sean Luke to point to him being involved in brutal killing or forming the intent to do so.

This was one of the arguments of defence attorney Mario Merritt who represents Akeel Mitchell who is before the court at a judge-only trial, indicted for Luke's murder sometime between March 25 and 29, 2006.

Also charged with Luke's murder is Richard Chatoo whose attorneys did not advance a no-case submission on his behalf since they admitted they were hamstrung to do so because of a video statement he allegedly gave to the police.

Merritt insisted his client, who was 13 at the time he was charged with the murder, had no case to answer since the prosecution's evidence was based purely on circumstantial evidence which were manifestly unreliable and will not take the court to a finding of guilt.

'Our position is that the State has failed in establishing a case against him (Mitchell),' Merritt said, adding that a link was missing from the chain of reasoning

'And, if a link is missing then it matters not how strong the other aspects of the case are the case must fall.'

Merritt said even if the DNA evidence, which linked Mitchell to the cane stalk inserted in to Luke through his anus, and spermatozoa found on the boy's underpants, the State failed to provide evidence to link his client to the killing. He also said although sperm was found in the boy's anus, it was not identified as belonging to Mitchell and even if you speculated it was his, the prosecution further failed to establish that the underwear Luke was wearing was clean before it could be suggested that the sperm belonged to his client.

'I think it is fatal to their case,' he said.

He also said although the defence's case was that Mitchell was not there at all, based on the State's case, then the question of the role he played must be answered.

He said there must be evidence that Mitchell killed, or assisted in Luke's murder.

'Where do we get the evidence of that murder? There is no evidence as to the role played by each party in the cane field. What did he do? Did he hold him down? Push the piece of cane? Block his mouth? You must first establish the 'joint enterprise' engaged in to bring about the death of the deceased,' Merritt said.c

'There is nothing in the evidence against him to show there was a plan to kill,' he insisted. He also said Chatoo's statements could not be used against Mitchel.

'What accused number two says in his evidence is evidence against him.'

Chatoo is expected to testify in his defence once the judge gives her ruling on Mitchell's submissions on Monday.

'What evidence is there against Mitchell as to the plan (to kill), his involvement in the plan and did he execute his plan? Is it the death was something outside of the plan and if it was, it cannot support a suggestion he agreed. The State must establish there was a plan,' Merritt said.

He also pointed out that Mitchell was not interview