Threats to murdered businessman’s wife to be admitted
US District Judge Dora L. Irizarry has ruled against allowing uncharged evidence of Roger Khan’s alleged involvement in the execution of businessman Devendra Persaud and boxing coach Donald Allison to be used at his trial, saying it is circumstantial and would be unduly prejudicial.
However, Judge Irizarry will allow evidence that Khan’s bodyguards threatened Persaud’s wife with a gun as she held her young child, saying the US government has sufficient evidence.
The ruling was made on a motion submitted by the government in July, in which it requested permission to admit the uncharged acts into evidence at the trial. Khan had challenged the motion. Khan is charged in an 18-count indictment with distribution, importation and possession of cocaine and engaging as principal administrator, organiser and leader of a continuing criminal enterprise in the Eastern District of New York and elsewhere.
After hearing arguments from both sides and reading an ex parte affidavit from the government detailing its proof of the allegations made against Khan, Irizarry ruled on Monday to grant and deny the motion in part.
In the ruling, seen by Stabroek News, the judge explained that in denying evidence of the two murders, the probative value gained – proof of the defendant’s leadership role – is substantially outweighed by the risk of undue prejudice, in addition to the insufficiency of the government’s proof. But in the case of the threat made against Persaud’s wife, Elizabeth, the judge ruled that the probative value of the threat made against the woman is high as it indicates Khan’s “leadership role, as well as his participation, knowledge and involvement in a drug conspiracy. The risk of prejudice does not substantially outweigh the probative value.” In disallowing evidence of the murders, Irizarry noted that Khan was not charged with violent conduct. However, in ruling to allow evidence of the threat, she agreed with the government’s argument that Khan is not charged with mere possession or distribution, or as a courier or low level criminal operative but as a leader of a continuing criminal enterprise, who faces a mandatory life sentence upon conviction. “Due to the nature of this charge, it is not unreasonable to infer that jurors might assume the existence of at least some violence. The evidence the government intends to offer as proof of this uncharged conduct is sufficient and the court holds that the evidence of threats made to Elizabeth is admissible,” the judge said.
Irizarry, however, reserved ruling on allowing Khan’s alleged seizure of Persaud’s vehicle as payment for a drug debt. The judge did, however, note that it is probative of the existence of a conspiracy between the two and Khan’s participation, knowledge and leadership of that conspiracy. She also pointed out that the risk of prejudice on that issue is minimal as it does not involve conduct more serious than that charged and a limiting instruction could lessen the prejudice. Based on the type of evidence proffered by the government as proof of Khan’s involvement in the theft of Persaud’s vehicle, she reserved her decision on the admissibility of the theft until there is an opportunity during the trial to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the sufficiency of the government’s proof.
Ledger
The US government has alleged that Khan and another Guyanese man, who is wanted by the US and is facing court proceedings locally, threatened Persaud’s wife. It also charged that Khan’s ‘phantom’ gang put a hit on Persaud when they discovered that he had a ledger on the drug business with their names in it. The government offered to provide evidence that Khan, his bodyguards and the man, who was also Persaud’s cocaine trafficking partner, had gone to Persaud’s wife boutique and pointed a gun at her while she held her young child in her arms. At the time, Persaud had been charged with bulk cash smuggling and conspiring to import cocaine into the US and they had demanded to know his case number.
Khan, through his lawyers, has denied involvement in the murders and among other things, his lawyers have said that Guyanese national cyclist Tyrone Hamilton, who was with Persaud at the time of his death, knew who killed Persaud and had told them so. Hamilton has since told Stabroek News that he did not know who killed Persaud and that he had told Khan’s lawyers no such thing.
The prosecution had told the court that it would offer first-hand testimonies from co-conspirators in the Persaud and Allison murders.
In court documents, the US government says Persaud relocated to the United States and settled in Queens, New York. He received cocaine from the Khan organisation, distributed it to others and then sent money back to the organisation in Guyana. Persaud’s cocaine trafficking partner [name mentioned], who is now in court, also went by the nicknames ‘Ledge’ and ‘Kevin’. That person was sometimes in the New York City area, and sometimes in Guyana during the cocaine conspiracy with Persaud.
Persaud was subsequently arrested in June 2003 at John F. Kennedy Airport, and was charged with bulk cash smuggling and conspiring to import cocaine into the United States. He was later released on bond and began cooperating with US law enforcement, including participating in numerous proffers and agreeing to have his cellular telephone calls recorded, among other things. After Persaud’s arrest, his partner returned to Guyana and remained here.
On December 22, 2003, Persaud’s wife, who resided in Guyana and operated a boutique, called him in Queens and informed him that ‘Shorty’ [a Khan nickname], his bodyguards, and ‘Ledge’ had come into her store and threatened and pointed a gun at her while she held their child. She also informed Persaud that they demanded to know his case number.
Two days after, Persaud jumped bail and returned to Guyana. After he fled, agents with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) searched his former residence and discovered, among other things, drug ledgers used by him, listing Khan by the alias “Shortman” with a telephone number as well as many other co-conspirators.
The US said individuals in the cocaine industry in Guyana, including Khan, suspected that Persaud was cooperating with US law enforcement. Khan and his closest associate were angry because they had learned that their names were contained in Persaud’s ledger and eventually Khan and his ‘Phantom Squad’ put a hit on Persaud. In October 2004, Khan was informed by a member of his organisation that Persaud was at the Palm Court restaurant in Guyana. In response, Khan allegedly stated that Persaud should be killed that night and shortly afterward Persaud was shot to death at the restaurant.
Meanwhile, the US government said its proof that Khan ordered the murder of Allison includes the testimony from a witness that Allison and others imported cocaine into the United States that was obtained from the Khan organisation. Also, that the cocaine was seized and that one of Khan’s co-conspirators demanded proof that the cocaine was seized, to prove that Allison and others had not stolen it. The prosecution also promised to produce testimony that “Allison refused to work in Khan’s organization, and once publicly insulted Khan.” Further, it offered testimony that Khan’s organisation shot Allison and that Khan took credit for killing him.
