Police Constable Mark Cameron was on Wednesday grilled about his nickname and said he could not recall whether he had been rebuked by Lindeners on July 18 for allegedly “shooting at innocent people”.
Cameron told the Commission of Inquiry that he was assigned as a driver on July 18 at Linden and remained at the vehicle for 12 hours in the vicinity of the Wismar/Mackenzie Bridge as his colleagues made attempts and subsequently managed to quell the situation there.
Cameron, who is attached to the anti-crime unit and was at the time stationed at the Mackenzie Police Station, said he lived in Linden for about 26 years.
Commissioner Dana Seetahal asked the witness if his nickname is ‘Cammy’ and he responded in the negative. “Did anyone ever say to you words to the effect ‘Cammy you shooting at innocent people, you shooting your own black people’”, Seetahal asked. Cameron said he could not recall.
“Does that mean it could have happened?” the commissioner further asked. She was given the same response that he could not recall. The witness said he did not know of any other rank on the ground whose name was Cameron as well or whose nickname is ‘Cammy’.
According to Cameron, he went to the bridge unarmed and drove nine persons to the destination with Station Sergeant English in charge of the unit. He said he initially went with the ranks and stood between the two line formations before he was told by Assistant Superintendent Patrick Todd to remain at the vehicle.
At the vehicle, he said, he heard ASP Todd use the siren and microphone, warning the large crowd gathered at the bridge, about 900 persons, to disperse and go to their homes.
“From my point of view, they didn’t respond,” he said. Cameron said that persons within the crowd started pelting bottles, stones and pieces of wood at the police at about 4pm, two hours after they arrived on the scene.
He told the commissioner that some of the ranks carried CP rifles, which is the tear smoke gun and some were armed with shotguns. He said he saw when tear smoke was fired and he maintained his position behind the force truck which was parked about a 100 or more feet away from the bridge. He said that he heard about three or four explosions coming from the western side but those were all during the 12-hour period he was there.
Cameron told the commission that missiles were thrown in his direction but he was not hit. He noted that he left with ranks at about 2 am on July 19 and that by that time, the crowd had dispersed and the bridge had been cleared. According to Cameron, the ranks used tear smoke to disperse the crowd which took about 25 to 30 minutes to clear. “About 18:00 hours they left. It was actually dark when the bridge was completely cleared,” he relayed.
Despite his earlier statement that he went to the bridge unarmed, the police constable said that he was required to hand over to English two canisters of tear smoke. He said he was issued with same by English before leaving the station.
“You said you weren’t armed,” Seetahal asked, prompting him to respond to the question whether he considers tear smoke a weapon.
“No ma’am,” he responded, adding that he did not sign to collect the tear gas.
Asked by Commissioner KD Knight for what purpose he was given two tear gas canisters, the witness paused before being prompted by Commissioner Cecil Kennard to answer the question. He subsequently said that the purpose of tear gas was to disperse the crowd gathered at the bridge. “Were canisters capable of being discharged without one of the guns?” Knight inquired and was told no. However, after being reminded of his claim that he was not armed and asked how he would have used the tear gas, Cameron said he was given hand canisters.
Under further questioning by Knight, the witness said he observed what was happening and saw no one, apart from the police, with any weapon. “Would you be surprised to hear that you are the only witness who has said that the bridge was clear after the tear smoke was fired… are you sure?” Knight asked the Police Constable who said he would not be surprised.
“Is it that you made an error that the bridge was clear? Do you stand by that?” Knight then asked.
“No sir, that is what I observed from my point of view,” Cameron stated.
