Dear Editor,
The news that a young man age nineteen was charged with the massacre of 11 innocent Guyanese in Lusignan on January 26, 2008 drew my interest. What is interesting about this story as reported in both Stabroek News and Kaieteur News is the scene of the young man’s family including his mother in fits of hysteria proclaiming his innocence inside the courtroom and outside of it. The Lusignan massacre is the most heinous act in its shared barbarity committed in Guyana. As such, there is tremendous pressure on law enforcement officers to bring those responsible to justice. But the question remains who are those, or rather, what are those, since who connotes a sense of humanity one can rationalize incapable of the kind of savagery and barbarism of the type committed upon 11 defenceless people including five children.
The major news organizations in Guyana have been reporting the name of one apparent criminal leader, Ronald “Fineman” Rawlins. But who are the others? Most accounts of the killings in both Lusignan and Bartica, where 12 people were massacred have listed the involvement of about 20 gunmen. Recent reports based on ballistic evidence released by the Guyana Police Force, (GPF) have linked the Lusignan and Bartica massacres to the same criminal gang. Besides the known suspected ‘ring leader,’ the rest of the gang remains unknown and an enigma.
So when a 19-year-old youth was picked up in Buxton by the police and charged with the murder of the 11 people in lusignan, it becomes imperative that we ask questions. Those interested in justice must ensure that justice is pursued in the interest of decency and morality, the latter of which is severely handicapped in Guyana. The manner in which justice is sought and dispensed must not be prejudiced by emotions, urgency or political pressure. There must be due diligence, coupled with a thorough and proper investigation.
Amidst the orgy of killings there is no doubt that tremendous pressure is exerted by the political directorates upon the GPF to “dominate the situation” and bring those responsible to justice. This pressure is understandable, given the joint services ineffectiveness in not only bringing crime under control but in solving many crimes. However, we must be cautious that justice does not mean prejudice in which suspicious looking young men from Buxton are rounded up and arrested by the police in an urgency to solve the crime. It is in this environment of anxiety that I write to caution those responsible for the dispensation of justice to be thorough so that justice indeed prevails. The young man recently charged with 11 counts of murder was picked up in and is from the village of Buxton/Friendship, admittedly the epicentre for criminal activities. Buxton/Friendship has therefore become a village where every villager especially the young men have a shadow of guilt cast upon them. So there is a tendency by the society to assume guilt whenever an accusation is levelled by the authorities upon villagers. The recent accusation is a very serious one. If this young man is guilty he deserves the full brunt of the law. But it is the responsibility of the criminal justice system not to succumb to political pressure but to ensure through thorough investigation and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty that this young man’s case and any other brought before the court is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. He should be accorded proper legal representation, if not given to him by the state, by some civic-minded attorneys or provided for through a charitable organization. If not, the Lusignan massacre, which was the gravest act of inhumanity, will perpetuate further acts of inhumanity and the society will be plunged into the abyss of immorality, in the process destroying the lives of many poor unemployed youth in an already marginalized village. Who is this young man? Has he been involved or suspected to be involved in other crimes. What do people who know him say about his character? These are important questions that those bringing charges of 11 counts of murder must ask. The society has a responsibility to ensure that a crime is not committed by the state on this young man or any other young men in the haste of solving a crime that most of society is outraged about.
Your faithfully,
Dennis Wiggins
