The widow of historian Dr Walter Rodney believes that claims published in a book authored by Gregory Smith, the suspect in his murder, were made to tarnish her husband’s character and seemed to have come “from a poorly written spy novel.”
Dr Patricia Rodney took the stand once more yesterday to continue and complete her testimony for the commission of inquiry (COI) into the June 13, 1980 death of her husband, who died in a bomb blast near the Camp Street Prison.
Mrs. Rodney was questioned on a number of claims made in Smith’s book, “Assassination Cry of a Failed Revolution: The Truth about Dr Walter Rodney’s Death” – a book she said that she never read. Smith was an army electronics expert and had handed over the device that exploded in Rodney’s lap as he sat in a car.
In the book, authored by William Gregory Smith, it was indicated that on June 13, 1980, Smith had a planned meeting with both Walter Rodney and Donald Rodney. However, Mrs. Rodney strongly refuted the claims and said that Donald Rodney’s arrival at the Rodneys’ South Ruimveldt home had been “completely unexpected” and “mere circumstance.”
According to Mrs. Rodney, the day of June 13, 1980 had been well-planned; both she and Walter had decided to stay home to further discuss their plans on moving to Zimbabwe, where Walter had been offered a new lecturing job. They further ran errands before working out transportation arrangements for the night ahead. Patricia explained that her two older children, Shaka and Kanini, were to attend a farewell party for a friend of theirs, while she and Asha, the youngest, would attend a fundraising event at the St. Agnes Primary School.
Walter, she said, was responsible for dropping everyone off to their respective events before heading to his 7pm meeting. He had been scheduled to pick them up when his meeting was finished.
However, these arrangements were changed when Donald Rodney showed up at their home before their departure; it was decided that he would drop Walter at his meeting in his car, while Patricia used the family car to ferry around herself and the children.
Patricia further said that Donald had not been a member or active in the Working People’s Alliance (WPA). She maintained that at no time during the day did Walter indicate that he was going out with Donald later for a meeting. From all indications, she said, it seemed that he was going to the meeting himself.
“From your knowledge of the entire day of June 13, 1980 and your own personal information, was Donald Rodney ever part in that plan to be part of a meeting?” Keith Scotland, who represents the interest of Donald Rodney in the inquiry, asked.
“No,” Mrs. Rodney immediately responded.
“Is it then not a fact that the assertion made on pages 35 to 37 of this book – as far as your first-hand knowledge of Dr Rodney’s schedule go – is untrue?” Scotland quickly followed.
“Totally untrue,” Mrs. Rodney emphasised.
‘Unreliable’
Though the woman had been aware that her husband had a planned meeting with Smith, at the time she had not known who he was; it was only until later did she learn that the man was Gregory Smith.
She further stressed that nowhere in his narrative to her did Walter ever mention that Donald was to be a part of the meeting.
She explained that she came to learn of meetings between Smith and her husband when, on the evening of June 12, 1980 – the night before Walter’s murder – the man turned up on her doorstep. Mrs. Rodney told the commission that the man had told her through the door that he and Walter had planned a meeting that evening; however, it had not come off and he had instead come to the house to speak with Walter. However, Patricia said, Walter was not at home and Smith subsequently left on foot.
Later, Walter returned home and when told of the visit he referred to Smith as “unreliable”; Patricia stated that Walter had always been a stickler for punctuality. She went on that around 2am on June 13, 1980, Walter received a phone call. From her husband’s end of the conversation, Patricia was able to surmise that it was the same man that had visited the house earlier to see Walter.
According to Patricia, Smith requested a meeting at that very moment, in the wee hours of the day. However, Walter refused and instead rescheduled the meeting for 7pm that evening.
Video:
Walter, she further said, never told her what the meeting with Gregory Smith was about and who the man was; she added that she never asked. She explained that she usually never asked Walter who persons were as she would assume that his meetings were usually related to the workings of the WPA.
“So, when this book asserts that Donald Rodney was a part of that pre-planned meeting on Friday thirteenth of June, 1980 at 7 o’clock it’s an unvarnished lie,” Scotland stated.
“Yes; totally false,” the woman agreed.
Mrs. Rodney further hit out at other claims in the book and stated that they were all aimed at the character assassination of her husband.
In his book, Smith wrote, “As a member of the WPA I was given several assignments by Dr Rodney which I completed successfully. I got my first assignment from Dr Rodney at my home. This was to identify people with various types of problems in the army, where I worked as an electronic technician.”
According to Smith, the targeted persons were persons who were dishonest and those who had problems, particularly financial or drug problems or dissatisfaction with their promotions. Smith claimed that Walter believed that the latter group could be easily persuaded to sell arms, ammunition, or any information in their possession; those with drug problems could co-operate in exchange for money to furnish their habits while dishonest persons could be blackmailed.
“I listed the names of people whom I thought fit these descriptions and gave this list to Dr Rodney. Members of the WPA contacted these people to work for us. Some of these people did work for us without knowing who had identified them for the WPA,” Smith wrote.
‘A very bad spy novel’
When questioned on any possible conspiracies between Smith and Walter, Mrs. Rodney gently laughed and refuted Smith’s admissions in his book. According to Patricia, Smith’s description of her husband were “completely out of character.”
She explained that her husband never drank or smoked and would certainly not prey on someone else’s addiction; instead, she said, Walter would try to help an addict rather than use them.
Video:
“He would not prey on someone who had a social problem…it’s not that he wouldn’t talk to someone who had a habit but he wouldn’t feed that habit,” she stated. She went on, “This is not the Walter Rodney I know…I don’t know who he [Smith] is talking about but not the person I know.”
Smith’s book further spoke of a plan to acquire arms and ammunition from the Guyana Defence Force (GDF) through espionage.
“At one of our meetings, Dr Rodney speculated on the prospect of hijacking a GDF dinner vehicle. Dressed as soldiers, he and some brothers would deliver the meals, after blending the coffee with a drug,” Smith said in his book. He went on, “Dr Rodney said the drug would act in ten to twenty minutes, putting everybody to sleep. In this way we could remove what weapons and ammunition were available at the location.”
After laughter had died down amongst those in attendance, Mrs. Rodney was asked by attorney Scotland to respond to Smith’s assertion. “It is not true and to be serious it’s like somebody writing a very bad spy novel,” she said before adding, “it’s very poorly written and it doesn’t make sense.”
Mrs. Rodney stated that though her husband was critical of the policies of the administration of the People’s National Congress (PNC), he had never expressed any violent reaction to the administration or head of state Forbes Burnham.
She further said that following her husband’s death, there had been no response from the administration for her advocacy from 1980 to 1992 for an inquiry. When questioned by PNC representative in the inquiry, attorney Basil Williams, she stated that she had raised no objections to the participation of the PNC or the WPA in the inquiry. In fact, she said, she had raised no objections to any group’s participation. She stressed that she simply wanted people on the inquiry who would be neutral and who had not been a part of what was happening in Guyana at the time.
Video:
When asked by Williams whether Gregory Smith had ever been in her home, she denied that he had, contrary to statements made during the inquiry by convict Robert Gates that he had met Smith on a visit to the Rodneys’ home.
Mrs. Rodney also denied that she had any knowledge of any explosives or walkie talkies and her husband being involved in any schemes and emphasised that Walter was not violent. “He believed in non-violent methods,” she stated. She went on, “I am in a position to say that because I knew the person [Walter].”
Harassment
During her time on the stand, Mrs. Rodney was further questioned on the harassment meted out by the state on the Rodneys return to Guyana; this time, however, she was questioned on the harassment meted out to persons outside of herself and Walter.
According to Patricia, anyone who came into contact with them was the subject of harassment and she believed that there was nothing that she or anyone else could do about it as the attacks had been state-sanctioned.
“I didn’t think anything would be done about it because of Walter Rodney. I think the state machinery was against him so who would we complain to?” she questioned.
The woman explained that the homes of Walter’s parents and her parents had been searched on occasion by police officers while Guyanese friends of theirs were threatened with unemployment for their association with the Rodneys.
Video:
Overseas-based friends were also threatened with deportation, she said.
Mrs Rodney recalled one incident where a female friend who worked in a ministry and who would regularly visit the Rodneys’ home was called into her boss’s office one day and told that she would lose her job if she continued her visits to the Rodneys. Patricia stated that she and Rodney dissuaded the friend from further visits and she complied and eventually lost contact with the family.
Mrs Rodney also recalled another incident where an overseas friend who had come into Guyana was told by immigration services that he would be deported from Guyana if he had visited the Rodneys during his stay in the country.
However, she went on, the harassment extended to her children as well; one music teacher was advised by state security officers that the Rodney children should not be allowed to attend lessons at her home, while Walter was refused entry into his daughter’s high school to drop off items for a birthday party. The school was reportedly told to not allow Walter to enter the premises under any circumstances.
The Rodney household was also the subject of extreme surveillance; a day after Walter’s return from a short trip to Zimbabwe, an army-issued vehicle was constantly parked across the street from their home – right up until the day before his death. Their home was also continuously searched for arms and ammunition.
“My take at the time was that they wanted to make our lives as uncomfortable as ever; not just his [Walter’s] life but our lives as well, I believe,” Patricia said.
Mrs. Rodney concluded her testimony yesterday and expressed gratitude that, after more than three decades, an inquiry had finally been launched. “It took a long time but I hoped that it would get to happen so that Guyanese can begin to heal, that I and my family can carry on with our lives and not have this hanging over us. I never wanted my children to be burdened with this,” she said before leaving the witness stand.
Today, Crime Chief Leslie James will take the stand once more.
