Man remanded after police find gun hidden behind AC vent during night search

A 26-year-old businessman was remanded to prison on Friday after appearing before Magistrate Annette Singh at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts to answer to a charge of illegal possession of a firearm.
Larry Adams, who pleaded not guilty, was charged after a weapon was allegedly discovered hidden behind an air conditioning vent in a car he had borrowed from his father.
Despite a detailed bail application from his attorney, Stacy Goodings, Magistrate Singh refused bail and ordered that the matter continue on June 27, by which time surveillance and body camera footage are expected to be presented in court.
According to the prosecution, Adams was intercepted on King Street, Georgetown, by officers who claimed they smelled marijuana emanating from the vehicle he was driving.
When asked to exit the vehicle and allow a search, he allegedly refused, locked the doors, and sped off, prompting a chase through the city.
“He was pulled over by police, but he locked his doors and refused to cooperate. After driving away, police had to pursue him again. Even then, when intercepted for the second time, he still refused to open the vehicle,” the prosecutor told the court.
It is alleged that police eventually gained access and conducted a search of the car. They claim the firearm, a large pistol, was found in the glove compartment area, easily accessible and visible upon opening the panel.
The investigating rank told the court that he opened the glove compartment, and as he squeezed the release clip, the entire panel fell down and the firearm became immediately visible, adding that body camera footage captured the discovery.
However, the footage was not produced in court on Friday.
The prosecution maintained that Adams’ actions during the encounter were suspicious and evasive, and they further disclosed that he was previously wanted in connection with another matter.
Additionally, the court heard that the vehicle in question is no longer in police custody. Officers claim that after photographing the scene and placing wheel ramps to immobilize the car, it was left overnight, but by the following morning, it had disappeared.
The car was later found parked at Princess and Smyth Streets, allegedly in the possession of persons known to the accused.
The defense Attorney, Goodings, argued strenuously for his release on bail, citing insufficient evidence to link him to the firearm.
“The gun was not found on his person or in any area that he had direct or exclusive control over. It was concealed behind the AC vent, which required internal removal to access,” Goodings said.
The defense explained that Adams had borrowed the car from his father earlier that evening to deliver cash to an employer and make two brief stops.
According to Goodings, the vehicle is regularly used by Adams’ father, a construction worker, and is often rented out to other individuals. A rental agreement was reportedly submitted to police to support this claim.
Goodings also revealed that Adams had recently returned from the interior and had no time or reason to tamper with the vehicle’s AC system. She emphasized that no fingerprints were recovered from the weapon, and police were not wearing gloves at the time of the arrest.
Goodings drew comparisons to R v. L (2012), a Canadian case in which a woman was acquitted after marijuana was found in a vehicle trunk. The court ruled in that matter that the prosecution failed to prove knowledge and control, two essential elements of possession.
In an attempt to persuade the court that Adams was not a flight risk, Goodings noted that her client runs a small auto parts business, employs staff, and is actively involved in his father’s construction company. She further stated that Adams does not possess a passport and has no history of fleeing the jurisdiction.
Despite the detailed submission, Magistrate Singh ruled that she was not satisfied there was a special reason to grant bail at this stage. She emphasized that she wanted to personally review the footage before making any further determination.
“This is not a trial,” Singh told the court. “I’m not taking evidence at this stage, but I want to see the footage for myself. I’ve made a note, and I’m giving a short adjournment.”
She ordered that the body camera and surveillance footage be brought before the court for review on the next date.