Rawle Newton was yesterday charged with murdering two gold dealers at Bartica, while four others, including a policeman, were accused of aiding and abetting in the crime.
Newton, who was also arraigned on two unrelated charges of armed robbery, was remanded as were Michael Newton, Marlon Letlow, Linden Scotland and Kim Bumbury. The four were charged with receiving, relieving, comforting, assisting and maintaining Rawle Newton, some time between September 5 and 16 at Georgetown, after he allegedly murdered Jainarine Raghubir and Ramdeo Deonarine. Letlow, a policeman attached to the Tactical Services Unit (TSU), who was stationed at Bartica, is alleged to have tried to blackmail Rawle Newton, after receiving stolen goods belonging to the dead men.
The five accused appeared at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court before acting Chief Magistrate Priya Sewnarine-Beharry, who heard that between September 4 and 5, at Bartica, Rawle Newton murdered Raghubir and Deonarine. He was not required to enter a plea to the capital charge.
The four accused of aiding and abetting him were also not required to plead to the indictable charges read to them.
Prosecutor Stephen Telford told the court that Bumbury had received money stolen from the dead men from Rawle Newton and she used it to purchase household items. He added that Letlow and Scotland, who both knew the man, received information that he had murdered Raghubir and Deonarine and took $1.2 million from him along with jewellery and other items belonging to the deceased. Further, Telford said, the duo later demanded an additional $2 million from him, for keeping him clear of prosecution for murder.
While Rawle Newton was unrepresented, during the 45-minute hearing the court heard submissions and bail applications advanced by four attorneys who sought bail for Michael Newton, Letlow, Scotland and Bumbury.
Telford opposed bail, citing the seriousness and prevalence of the offences. He said too that there is a likelihood of the defendants fleeing the jurisdiction and tampering with the witnesses.
Letlow, 25, of 23 Beterverwagting, East Coast Demerara, a serving member of the Guyana Police Force, was represented by attorney Nigel Hughes, who said the man was prepared to clear his name of the charges. He denied that Letlow harboured anyone in connection with the murder and dared the police to prove that he was involved in the case, noting that he never offered a confession statement.
Hughes said Letlow has been attached to the TSU for some seven years. He added that the man was stationed in Bartica, where he was arrested by police, who informed him that he was needed for questioning in connection with his involvement in the murders. He further noted that the prosecution is known for advancing weak positions of witness tampering and the possibility of flight from the jurisdiction in order to deny defendants their pre-trial liberty. However, Hughes said those arguments had no bearing in the case, since Rawle Newton is the principal witness in the matter and he had been remanded. “Which witness will he [Letlow] tamper with?” the lawyer asked.
Attorney Vic Puran, who represented Scotland, said his client should have been charged with receiving stolen articles, rather than the offence of aiding and abetting. According to him, the prosecution has to show that he fulfilled one or all of the elements listed in the charge. “Your worship, the police would have to prove that my client received, relieved, comforted, assisted and maintained Rawle Newton…,” Puran said. “I am not saying that my client could not properly be charged with a criminal offence. I am just saying that he should not have been charged with this particular offence.”
According to Puran, those who instituted the charges did so for a charge not commensurate with the facts given by the prosecutor. Noting that not one element of the charge has been shown by the police, Puran said that though the case is not yet at its evidence-proving stage, the police have already failed at the elementary stage, since they are advancing what they merely think they can prove. He then submitted that the matter should be struck out.
Hughes added that “more than anything, the prosecution’s facts show a case of extortion as opposed to aiding and abetting.” Puran and Hughes both also noted that their clients were held in excess of the 72 hours stipulated by the constitution.
Peter Hugh, who entered an appearance for Bumbury, 39, of Agricola, declared that his client maintained her non-involvement in the events. He also said that contrary to what the prosecutor had said, Bumbury was not the common-law wife of Rawle Newton. He said that they once shared a relationship but that it was terminated prior to the events of the case. Hugh said too that the woman bought items for her house with her hard-earned money.
Attorney Gordon Gilhuys said his client Michael Newton, 33, was anxious to be vindicated of the charges. According to Gilhuys, police have charged that his client received items associated with the incident and as a result he argued that his client should have been charged simply with the offence of receiving stolen property.
Bail was denied to all the accused and both Newtons were remanded until October 27, when the case will be heard at the Bartica Magistrates’ Court; Letlow, Scotland and Bumbury were ordered to return to the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court on October 4, for statements.
Meanwhile, Rawle Newton pleaded not guilty to two charges of armed robbery. It was alleged that on August 14, at Georgetown, being armed with a gun, he robbed Justin Gilkes of $40,000. On the same day, it is alleged that, being armed with a gun, he also robbed Hardon Happy of a quantity of jewellery, cash and other items, valuing $2.1 million. He pleaded not guilty to the charges and is due to return to Court Five on September 24 for statements.
