Doctor’s Graphic Testimony Reveals Brutality Of Haiti President’s Assassination

/0 Comments/in /by

News Americas, MIAMI, FL, Fri. Mar. 13, 2026: Jurors in the federal trial linked to the assassination of Haiti’s President Jovenel Moïse heard graphic testimony Thursday from the doctor who conducted the autopsy on the slain leader, revealing the extent of the violence that ended his life.

Dr. Jean Demorcy, the Haitian physician who performed the autopsy on July 10, 2021 – three days after Moïse was killed- told jurors the president suffered numerous gunshot wounds and extensive trauma across his body during the attack at his private residence in Port-au-Prince.

FLASHBACK – Martine Moïse grieves during the funeral for her husband, slain Haitian President Jovenel Moïse, on July 23, 2021, in Cap-Haitien, Haiti, the main city in his native northern region. – Moïse, 53, was shot dead in his home in the early hours of July 7. (Photo by Valerie BAERISWYL / AFP) (Photo by VALERIE BAERISWYL/AFP via Getty Images)

Demorcy testified that Moïse sustained at least a dozen gunshot wounds along with multiple fractures, including injuries to his skull, pelvis, vertebrae, left arm and left leg. Additional trauma was documented across the president’s thorax, abdomen and limbs.

X-rays presented to jurors showed bullet fragments scattered throughout Moïse’s body. According to the doctor, the fatal injury was a gunshot wound that pierced the president’s heart.

FLASHBACK – A supporter of Haitian President Jovenel Moise prays at a memorial marking the first anniversary of his assassination, in Port-au-Prince on July 7, 2022. Haiti marked one year since Moise was shot dead in his private residence, with no mastermind or motive for the attack identified, and the investigation stalled. Moise was assassinated in the early hours of July 7, 2021, when a commando group entered his bedroom at the house in Port-au-Prince and shot him 12 times. (Photo by RICHARD PIERRIN/AFP via Getty Images)

Demorcy also testified that Moïse sustained a gunshot wound to the head after the fatal shot. One of the head wounds, he said, appeared to have been fired from extremely close range – less than one meter away – based on gunpowder markings observed near the president’s left ear.

The doctor told jurors that while some bullets and fragments were removed during the autopsy, others remained in the body because extracting all of them would have taken days and risked further damage to the remains.

Prosecutors also displayed several bullets and fragments that were recovered during the examination.

Moïse, 53, was assassinated in the early hours of July 7, 2021, when a group of armed men stormed his home near Port-au-Prince. The attack plunged Haiti into deeper political turmoil in a country already struggling with instability and rising gang violence.

Since the assassination, Haiti has not had another elected president. The federal trial underway in Miami centers on four South Florida men accused of helping orchestrate the plot to kill the Haitian leader.

They are among a larger group of individuals linked to the conspiracy that prosecutors say involved foreign mercenaries, financiers and political actors.

The trial also heard emotional testimony from Moïse’s daughter, Jomarlie Moïse, who returned to the witness stand Thursday. She told jurors she was inside the family home when gunmen broke into the residence and killed her father. During the attack, she said she hid in a bathroom with her brother and the family’s dog, Delilah.

Jomarlie Moïse testified that the residence typically had between 30 and 50 security guards assigned to protect the property. She also described multiple security layers around the home, including a nearby police station, road checkpoints, surveillance cameras and a guard shack.

Family members would normally call ahead before arriving so security personnel could prepare for their entry, she said. Earlier in the trial, former First Lady Martine Moïse also testified about the night of the assassination and alleged that individuals involved in her husband’s killing now hold positions of power in Haiti.

She further revealed that she herself had been under investigation by Haitian authorities in connection with the assassination – something she claims is politically motivated.

Martine Moïse was seriously wounded during the attack and later flown to Miami for treatment.

Jurors also heard testimony from a physician at Jackson Memorial Hospital who treated her after she arrived in Florida. The doctor explained that Moïse had to be registered under several aliases while receiving medical care due to security concerns. He also told the court that the former first lady spoke fluent English and did not require a translator during her treatment.

The trial is expected to continue today, March 13, 2026, with the cross-examination of Dr. Demorcy as attorneys continue to unravel the complex international conspiracy surrounding the assassination of Haiti’s president.

RELATED: “Honey, We Are Dead” – Former First Lady Recounts Night of Haiti President’s Assassination

Leadership – The Value Of Leading With Direction Versus The Folly Of Micromanaging

/0 Comments/in /by

By Dr. Isaac Newton

News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Fri. Mar. 13, 2026: Across the world, institutions are navigating a period of profound uncertainty. Economies shift rapidly, technology disrupts industries, and citizens demand real solutions from the institutions meant to serve them. Families seek stability. Governments face rising expectations. Businesses must innovate constantly. Faith-based organizations, nonprofits, and universities are under pressure to remain relevant in communities whose needs evolve quickly. In such a climate, leadership cannot simply manage activity. Leadership must provide direction. Organizations do not move forward because people are busy. They move forward because leaders clarify where they are going and why it matters.

The most impactful leaders understand a simple principle: lead the destination, not the details. Leadership begins by defining the purpose that guides decisions and unites effort. A leader cannot possess all the answers in a complex world, but a leader can ensure that the mission is unmistakably clear. When people understand the destination, they begin to align their thinking, creativity, and energy toward achieving it. Direction does not suppress initiative; direction releases it. In families, parents who establish clear values while allowing children responsibility cultivate confidence and maturity. In business, executives who define strategic priorities and empower skilled teams to execute within them unlock innovation and speed. In government, leaders who articulate national goals that align policy, investment, and citizen participation create momentum for development.

Micromanagement represents the opposite instinct. It emerges when leaders attempt to control every task, supervise every decision, and review every detail. Often, this behavior grows from pressure and fear of failure. Yet its effects are predictable. Micromanagement turns capable professionals into permission seekers. Decisions slow. Creativity diminishes. Talented people disengage because their judgment is never truly trusted. Institutions rarely collapse overnight under micromanagement. Instead, they quietly stagnate while more adaptive organizations move ahead.

Research on leadership behavior consistently shows that transformational and directional leaders focus on outcomes rather than processes. They lay the roadmap but allow their followers to apply their own footprints. They clarify goals, empower capable people, and measure results. By contrast, micromanaging leaders devote disproportionate energy to minor procedures while losing sight of the larger purpose. Over time, this approach produces cultures of dependency rather than responsibility. People wait to be told what to do instead of stepping forward with initiative. In environments that demand innovation and agility, such cultures inevitably fall behind.

Directional leadership requires three simple disciplines. First, clarify the destination. Leaders must define a small number of priorities that explain what success looks like. Second, trust capable people. Responsibility must be delegated to those with the expertise to act. Third, measure results. Directional leaders evaluate outcomes rather than controlling every step of the process. These practices apply across every institution that shapes society. Families flourish when values guide behavior and responsibility is shared. Businesses thrive when talented employees are empowered to solve problems. Governments accelerate development when citizens and institutions participate actively in building the future. Universities, faith communities, and nonprofit organizations remain relevant when their work addresses real needs in the lives of people.

Leadership ultimately reveals itself in how power is used. The leader who tries to control every detail becomes the bottleneck of progress. The leader who provides direction multiplies the strength of others. In a world defined by complexity and rapid change, societies cannot rely on leaders who suffocate initiative. They require leaders who clarify the destination, trust people to move toward it, and release the collective intelligence of the communities they serve. Direction creates momentum. Momentum builds the future.

Editor’s Note: Dr. Isaac Newton is a leadership strategist, educator, and public speaker specializing in governance, institutional transformation, and ethical leadership. Trained at Harvard, Princeton, and Columbia, Dr. Newton brings a multidisciplinary perspective to leadership development across the public, private, academic, and faith-based sectors. He is the coauthor of Steps to Good Governance, a work that explores practical frameworks for accountability, transparency, and institutional effectiveness. Dr. Newton has designed and delivered seminars for corporate boards, educators, public officials, and community leaders throughout the Caribbean and internationally. His work integrates insights from leadership research, psychology, public policy, and faith-informed ethics to equip leaders to guide organizations through uncertainty with clarity, courage, and measurable impact.

RELATED: Compromise or Concession? Rethinking Dr. Isaac Newton’s Approach to Intimacy