The release of two persons who were charged with two separate killings has raised questions as to the effectiveness of the justice system and the competence of police investigators and prosecutors.
Local cricketer Carlyle Barton was freed of a murder charge on Tuesday by Magistrate Fabayo Azore, who found that there was insufficient evidence offered by the prosecution and as such he could not be committed to stand trial in the High Court. The major issue in this case was that a video recording of the shooting which implicated Barton was never tendered, as the investigating rank had never returned to court to do so.
Then on Thursday, 76-year-old Jahora Ramnauth walked out of the High Court a free woman. She had been accused of murdering her partner in 2008. During the preliminary inquiry in the lower court the prosecution had failed to tender the post-mortem report to establish the victim’s cause of death.
A security source told Stabroek News that the outcome of these two matters raises serious concerns. “Where are we going? There is no obvious effort being undertaken to stem the tide,” the source said adding that developments such as these do not send a good message to the public.
The source said that members of the public should have the confidence in the police and the justice system that everything possible would be done to ensure that justice is served.
“Is it that [police delinquency] is being condoned at the highest level? You have got to ask yourself many questions,” the source said adding that based on what has been happening over the last few weeks people are taking the law into their own hands due to the inability of the police to give them justice. “It is a frightening trend,” the source said, making reference to the sudden death of Dexter Marshall who had been acquitted of the murder Mark Caesar and the November 12 gunning down of Rayburn Harvey. Harvey who had been accused of the 2006 murder of Samantha Belle was freed by a High Court jury in 2012.
Speaking about the Barton case, the source said, “he did what he did so publicly and was then allowed to go free.”
Barton a 23-year-old resident of Lot 39 Hadfield Street was charged with the murder of Shawn Nelson, a family friend.
The video recording, which was captured by a CCTV camera set up on a shop nearby, showed Barton walking south along Orange Walk and Nelson heading north. As the two approached a parked car, the footage showed Barton pulling out a gun, aiming it at Nelson and then pulling the trigger. He then calmly opens the driver’s side door of the car, jumps in and drives off, the front wheel of the vehicle barely missing Nelson’s head. At that point Nelson was still alive and his body was shaking from the shock of being shot.
Shortly after the shooting, the video hit social media. What was surprising was that the images were very clear.
The security source told this newspaper that often when police are not satisfied with the outcome of a matter at the magistrate’s Court level, they arrest that person before they leave the jurisdiction of the court or make dogged efforts to do so afterwards. One of the many instances where this occurred was the case of former beauty queen Carolan Lynch, who had been charged with the murder of her husband, Swiss House Cambio dealer Farouk Razack in May 2007. Razack was found dead on the floor of the Eping Avenue, Bel Air home he shared with Lynch and their daughter. He had been strangled, but there were no witnesses. Lynch had said she had found him dead on the floor when she returned home after taking the child to school.
In 2008 at the end of a PI into the murder, Magis-trate Gordon Gilhuys had ruled that no prima facie case was made against her and the matter was discharged. Since then the police have been persistent in their efforts to place Lynch back before the courts.
This was not the case with the Barton matter and according to the source this is quite surprising.
He said that not only was Barton caught committing the murder but it was clear that he committed a number of offences including having an unlicensed gun and fleeing the scene of a crime, for which he is yet to
be charged.
The source noted that in similar such cases, “…[The police] does throw the whole book at you…This matter was such a public affair.”
The source said that someone came forward and provided the police with evidence, an occurrence that is rare. “What message does this send to people who want to cooperate with the police? The police are always complaining that people don’t want to cooperate but here you have a person who did and the perpetrator still walked free.”
Meanwhile a legal source said that the biggest question to be answered is whether an arrest warrant was issued for the investigating rank who had to tender the video recording. One of Nelson’s relatives had told Stabroek News that the investigating rank had testified about the footage and its contents earlier in the preliminary inquiry. When asked at that point why he did not have the footage, the rank reportedly explained that this piece of evidence was locked in a cupboard for which the Officer in Charge had the key. He had said that up to the time that he left for court the officer had not arrived.
The relatives said that the particular rank had to return to court but on each occasion that his name was called, the court was told that he was at another location.
Stabroek News has since learnt that the rank had been transferred to an out of town location and as such was unable to attend court. This rank was among about six who failed to attend court.
The source told this newspaper that if this was indeed the case, the magistrate should have allowed the prosecution more time, pointing out that there are “plenty matters like this.”
Crime Chief Seelall when asked about this particular matter said that the normal practice for the police is to investigate and send the file to the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) who would normally advise on whether to re-charge. Persaud said advice is also given on the absence of the police ranks and he pointed out that the force had taken a “whole lot” of disciplinary actions against ranks. He said too this normal practice will be applied in this case.
Up to when Stabroek News spoke with Persaud last Friday afternoon, he could not say definitively if a file on this matter had been sent to the DPP.
End of matter
Stabroek News was told that as it relates to the elderly woman, that was the end of that matter. A source said that since the jury returned a formal verdict of not guilty, she is free and will remain free. This newspaper was told that she could not be re-arrested and recharged.
Ramnauth, called ‘Zaimool,’ was on trial for killing Subaschand, called ‘Bruk up,’ which occurred on April 1, 2008 at Zeeburg, West Coast Demerara. She was charged with murder but was committed to stand trial for manslaughter and released on bail.
The preliminary inquiry was done by Magistrate Fazil Azeez.
The case against Ramnauth was that the couple had been drinking and later in the evening began to row. During the row, Subaschand was severely beaten. He was taken to the Leonora Diagnostic Centre, then transferred to the George-town Public Hospital where he died later that night. Neighbours had said that the woman regularly beat Subaschand, with whom she had been living for a year.
Justice Navindra Singh prior to the verdict had upheld a no-case submission by the woman’s attorney. He later said “there is no post-mortem report or testimony telling us how or if he [Subaschand] died. The police did not know him personally and there was no evidence to conclude that Dr Singh performed a post-mortem examination.”
Stabroek News understands that after the committal the DPP instructed the magistrate to reopen the matter so that the necessary evidence could have been taken. This newspaper understands that the court at this point had a difficulty in locating the woman and there were other hurdles that police apparently were unable to overcome. Stabroek News was told that a rank did testify that he witnessed the post-mortem examination. That rank apparently was in possession of a post-mortem report, but for some reason, the prosecutor failed to ask him about it. The post-mortem report was returned to the Leonora Police Station and lodged. The rank was later transferred, this newspaper was told.
This raises serious concerns as to whether police prosecutors, as opposed to trained lawyers (whether state prosecutors or special prosecutors) should be allowed to handle capital offences.
“Magistrates need to examine carefully, on the basis of what they commit,” the source said adding that they are the ones who have to ensure that all the elements have been established. Among those elements are that the person is indeed dead and that the person did not die of natural causes.
