Relatives of murdered Canadian national Moneer Hussain say they fear that the police’s gross negligence in the investigation may rob them of closure, particularly since the stack of evidence against the only suspect in the matter is being ignored.
More so they say there is an information blackout on the progress of the investigation, if any, and even Canadian officials have been shut out.
Bibi Khan, Hussain’s daughter recently told Stabroek News from her home abroad that the family feels that with the passage of time the case will join the list of the country’s unsolved murders.
She said they are comforted by the fact that the media here are trying the keep the case alive.
Speaking on behalf of the family, she said, “We believe the suspect who was originally arrested and set free three days later is the person who killed my father. His alibi conflicted with his wife’s statement.”
Police officials had said it was after several leads that the suspect, who they described as “a junkie”, was arrested. However, he was released subsequently owing to a lack of evidence.
Crime Chief Seelall Persaud while not going into details assured this newspaper that the case was still active. “We had one suspect. He is still a suspect [who is] on bail,” he stressed.
When Khan spoke to this newspaper she highlighted a list of inconsistencies in the behaviour of the suspect which she said were red flags indicating that he was somehow involved.
The still grief-stricken woman told Stabroek News that if he were charged the prosecution can prove allegations levelled against the accused on the basis of circumstantial evidence. “The prosecution can establish an unbroken chain of events leading to the determination that the inference being drawn from the evidence that the accused had committed the crime,” Khan said, pointing out that the suspect was set free three days after he was arrested.
The circumstantial evidence in the case, according to her, was that the suspect’s alibi conflicted with his wife’s statement; that he did not show up for work on the day of the murder; that he was a labourer working next door and knew the movements of Hussain; that he was a witness when Hussain changed foreign currency the day before he was murdered; that he heard when Hussain said that he was going to the seawall; that he was known as a career criminal in the village (was in and out of jail frequently) and that he was known by villagers to frequent the seawall where Hussain was later found murdered.
Khan recalled that her 77-year-old father had travelled to Guyana on October 9 on vacation. While in Guyana, she said, he was staying with relatives at Blankenburg, West Coast Demerara.
She added that on October 22, around 9.30 am, he left his home for a short walk and was later found “robbed and murdered”. While describing him as a “charitable, quiet, loving and caring father and grandfather,” Khan said, “my family suffered greatly, and will continue to suffer for the rest of our lives. This suffering is compounded by the lack of closure from this unsolved murder. The criminal is walking free”.
Khan was viewed as a philanthropist who while in Guyana would assist the poor.
No information
As with many murder investigations, relatives complained that they never receive any police updates. Khan said that following the murder they had met the crime chief but to date have heard nothing further about the investigation.
She said too that the Canadian Foreign Affairs case worker in Ottawa had advised them that an official from the Canadian High Commission in Georgetown had not been able to get any information from the Leonora Police Station.
She indicated that her family was willing “to pay for the forensic science [tests] to establish facts of interest in relation to this brutal crime”. She stressed that they don’t have any help from the government or the police in terms of information.
Inaccurate
Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Shalimar Ali-Hack in a letter dated in January had blasted the police for their poor investigations of a list of serious crimes which included all the murders that occurred in `D’ Division. Hussain’s name was on that list.
When asked about this, the crime chief said some inaccurate statements were made by the DPP. “There were some inaccuracies in what the DPP said,” he stated.
Ali-Hack had said that the police file that was received showed “glaring and inadequate” police investigations. She noted that from the photographs taken and even some of the statements provided by the investigating ranks, it was evident that the man was found in a kneeling position with his underpants pulled down.
He also sustained severe abrasions on both knees, which was an indication that severe pressure had been applied to him while in that kneeling position on a hard surface. In addition to this, she said, there were apparent fingernail scratches on both sides of his abdomen, going upwards. “These are all signs pointing to one logical conclusion: that Moneer Khan [Hussain] was apparently sodomised,” she said. “None of this was reflected in the coroner’s report and neither was it addressed by the pathologist since no mention was made in the post-mortem report and there is no evidence that this part of Moneer Khan’s anatomy was ever examined by the pathologist,” she added.
Persaud said this was inaccurate since a swab was taken of Hussain’s anus and that information was contained in the pm report which formed part of the file which would have been sent to the DPP’s chamber for advice.
It is unclear what evidence investigators were able to garner from the swab if any.
A security source pointed out that with all police investigations the first 72 hours are the most critical. Referring to this case, the source said it was clear from the beginning that there were clues the police could have followed but chose not to.
According to the source, from all indications once the suspect was released that was the end of the investigations. It was stated that it is insufficient for police to say that the investigation is open without showing signs that work was being done on the ground.
The source said the extreme measures the killer took showed that careful planning went into the murder. More so, it was pointed out that the killer had to have been following the elderly man and pounced on him while he was in the isolated area.
Stabroek News was also told that it was strange that the man left home at 9.30 am and was discovered at 6.30 pm. According to the source, there is a possibility that someone passing the area during that time heard something. The source also noted the amount of time it would have taken for the killer to remove some of the man’s clothing and commit the act.
The source questioned what efforts police made to establish if there was a possible eyewitness to the crime, noting that there are too many loose ends in the case.
Relatives had said that after hours had passed and the elderly man had not returned they became worried. They first assumed that he had gone to visit relatives at La Jalousie, but when contacted they said that they had not seen him all day.
It was at this point that an alarm was raised and the search party headed in the direction of the seawall. They first found the man’s hat. Not too far from his hat, they found his slippers and eventually, his body, lying face down in a very shallow pool of water. Relatives reported that while the man’s body appeared intact, his face seemed to be smashed in certain parts. His wallet was missing.
