`It was win at all costs!’
Robert Simels and his assistant Arianne Irving knew that Roger Khan was involved in narcotics, prosecutor Morris Fodeman told a Brooklyn, New York courtroom yesterday and he charged that Simels dispatched star witness Selwyn Vaughn like a loaded weapon to threaten witnesses.
In his presentation before Judge John Gleeson, rebutting Monday’s submissions by defence counsel Gerald Shargel, Fodeman highlighted to the jury the transcript in which Vaughn, a paid informant for the US authorities, admits that his cousin worked for Khan. According to a Capitol News report, Vaughn’s cousin was in Suriname and did not follow Khan’s instructions and ended up in a drive-by after a drug deal that went bad, and then in jail. He questioned how Simels and Irving did not know that Khan was into drugs when Vaughn admits this on tape. He also questioned why Simels told Vaughn, who repeatedly called Khan ‘The Boss’, to not describe him that way. “When you are caught on tape,” Fodeman said, “you can’t deny what you said, you have to deny what was meant.” He maintained that it was not just legalese or “lawyer-speak” but rather it was an intent to obstruct justice and tamper with and bribe the witnesses.
He said that while the defendants would want the jury to believe that they were victims of a manipulative client and blame everyone but themselves, it was more a case of win at all cost. Lawyers, he said, cannot ignore their oaths and commit crimes and if they do they must be held accountable. And while Shargel had argued that it was Vaughn who was trying to reach out to Simels, Fodeman dismissed this position and pointed out that the emails showed Simels was interested by sending Vaughn “contact me” emails.
The prosecutor also mentioned the ‘Dancing Man’ letter written by Khan to “My Brother Paul” that directed Paul to have ‘Dancing Man’ contact the family of one of the prospective witnesses and others in Guyana which he described as an attempt to tamper with witnesses.
‘Red herring’
Fodeman argued that Irving cannot get away with the “I was not involved I was away in Europe Defence” as she was passing messages between Simels and Khan at the Metropolitan Correctional Centre where Khan is housed.
Touching on the contentious eavesdropping equipment, the prosecutor said that it cannot be “the government made me do it defence” as the equipment was in Simels’ possession for nearly two months before the prosecution requested to examine the source of recordings he had furnished them. Whether the equipment worked or not was a ‘red herring,’ the prosecutor declared, as he waved his Blackberry mobile phone in front of the jury and stated, “If I take out the battery it is designed to be a Blackberry. It is design, not operability and this equipment was designed to eavesdrop as Peter Myers [the Smith Myers official who testified in court about the equipment] testified.”
Fodeman said the case is not about photographs of drug dealers or about paying an informant for parking, or about visas, or how much money an informant got. He argued that it is about what you are not supposed to do, whether you are a lawyer or a regular civilian. The prosecutor said one is not supposed to pay witnesses or try to get them to say what is not true on the stand and it is not good enough to play by the rules 99% of the time. “It does not mean you must throw away the rules even if you think that your client is innocent! You can’t put a gun to someone’s head to get them to say what you want to say,” Fodeman said. Vaughn, he added, was sent out by Simels like a loaded weapon to threaten people to get off the Khan case and while they did a lot of things right, the case is about what they did wrong.
The issue of whether Simels believed Vaughn was really going to be used as a witness was also addressed as Fodeman questioned if Vaughn was being treated as an investigator why was the US$1000 in 20 dollar notes not in the detailed billing records that Simels produced in court. Simels’ attorney had shown the court in evidence details of expenditure on Khan’s case amounting to over $1.2 million dollars. Some of that money was spent on licensed private investigators but none was listed as being spent on Vaughn. Fodeman asked the jury to consider if Simels was not calling Vaughn to be a witness why discuss being a witness with Vaughn over ten times on the tapes.
Fodeman also dealt with the contention that a prospective witness was being sought to catch her in a Simels sting operation. “If it were a sting operation why was Selwyn Vaughn left in the dark? Why would a witness fee be paid? Why play hardball with the money if were all just a set up for a bribe? And why was law enforcement not called to participate in the operation or even an investigator? Why Simels did not cover himself?” he asked the jury. He answered that it was because no evidence exists that it was a sting.
‘Caution’
In his charge to the jury, seen by this newspaper, Judge Glesson told them that in determining the issues of fact presented in the case, it is their duty as jurors to consider all the evidence before them with complete impartiality and to render their verdict without bias, prejudice, or sympathy as to either the defendants or the government.
The judge, in his 26 page charge, also addressed the issue of Vaughn being a paid informant.
“You have heard the testimony of Selwyn Vaughn, a paid informant who was employed by the government to investigate the defendants. The government is permitted to use and to compensate paid informants during its investigations and prosecutions. However, because such informants have a financial incentive to curry favour with the government, their testimony should be scrutinized with care and viewed with caution when you decide how much of it to believe. You should ask yourself whether the informant would benefit more by lying, or by telling the truth. If you believe that the witness was motivated by hopes of personal gain, was the motivation one which would cause him to lie, or was it one which would cause him to tell the truth? Did his motivation colour is testimony?”
However, the judge told the jury on the other hand that their personal feelings about the government’s use of confidential information are irrelevant, and that they should not enter into their deliberations in any way. He said if they are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants committed the offences charged in the indictment, the government’s use of an informant is irrelevant to their determination. The jury began deliberating yesterday and will continue today.
Simels and Irving are facing several witness tampering charges. Simels is also charged with alleged exporting from Guyana to the US the cellular intercept equipment allegedly used by Khan for surveillance here. The trial has seen Vaughn, confessed member of the ‘Phantom gang’-which the prosecution said was a band of killers headed by Khan-testify among other things that Khan had met with Minister of Health Dr Leslie Ramsammy on two occasions and that he himself had met the minister following Khan’s incarceration in the US. Vaughn, who has been paid by the prosecution, had also said that Khan ordered the killing of activist Ronald Waddell. The court was also told that the Guyana Government purchased the intercept equipment from UK-based from Smith Myers, through an outlet in the US. One of the company’s executive, Peter Myers, testified to this effect. Both the government and Dr Ramsammy have vehemently denied these claims.
