Judge Sets Ruling Date on Key Evidence in Elmer Nah Murder Case

Justice Nigel Pilgrim has set Monday, December 15, as the date he will deliver his decision on the admissibility of several key pieces of evidence in the ongoing voir dire for 43-year-old ex-police officer Elmer Nah, who is accused of the triple murder of the Ramnarace family in Belmopan on December 31, 2022.  The ruling was reserved late this evening following one hour and fourteen minutes of closing oral arguments presented before Justice Pilgrim in the High Court. The session began at 1:10 p.m. and concluded at 2:23 p.m.  Nah, who has been on remand at the Belize Central Prison, is facing trial for one of Belize’s most high-profile murder cases. The voir dire, focused solely on determining which evidence can be admitted, has stretched over several months, beginning in April 2025, encountering delays, and resuming in October.  Justice Pilgrim will rule on whether the following items are admissible: (1) an alleged headlight police say the shooter wore; (2) A pair of boots found in Nah’s pickup truck; (3) A battle dress uniform seized from his home and (4) several video recordings, reportedly extracted from an SD card that later went missing before trial.  He further instructed both the Crown and the defense to keep December 15–18 open, as the decision could determine how the case will proceed.  During closing arguments, defense attorney Dr. Lynden Jones argued that the Crown had failed to establish a clear and reliable identification of Nah as the shooter.  He pointed out that surviving witness Vivian Ramnarace never described Nah’s physical features nor gave a detailed account of what the shooter looked like. The defense also challenged the lighting conditions at the crime scene, the authenticity of the videos, and the disappearance of the original SD card.  Jones argued that all video footage presented were copies, and that the metadata showed signs of modification, raising concerns of tampering.  He also questioned why a proper identification parade was never conducted, suggesting the outcome could have been different.  In response, Crown Counsel Terrence Williams maintained that an ID parade was unnecessary because Vivian Ramnarace already knew the accused, describing him as a “popular police officer” whose image she had previously seen in relation to other cases. Williams said this familiarity strengthened her recognition of the shooter.  The Crown insisted that the witness did, in fact, describe an object on the shooter’s head, though not specifically a light.  In his defense, Nah took the witness stand and testified that he was at home with family on the night of the murders. His nephew backed this claim, stating that from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., they were together drinking and even visited a nearby bar. The nephew also said that noises believed to be gunshots were dismissed by Nah as early New Year’s fireworks.  Justice Pilgrim emphasized that the court would not be available next week and that a detailed written ruling would be delivered on December 15. The decision will determine which evidence, if any, will be admitted when the main trial resumes.