The relatives of Nigel Isaacs were left in a state of shock and surprise when they received word that the murder charge against his “friend”, who had reportedly accidentally shot him in his head had been withdrawn.
Isaacs, a 49-year-old seaman and butcher was a husband and father to four children. During the evening of May 10 he died from a bullet wound to the head which he had sustained hours earlier when an enraged Andre Gomez reportedly opened fire on a man who had jammed his vehicle which was parked on Main Street near a popular night spot. The bullets missed their intended target but struck Isaacs who was standing nearby, at least once.
Gomez, a licensed firearm holder was arrested on the spot and charged days later with murder. No substitute charge was recommended and as such Gomez walked out of the court room last Tuesday a free man. This was his second court appearance and he would have spent a total of 27 days in the Georgetown Prisons.
Last Tuesday, the prosecutor Bharat Mangru made an application to have the charge withdrawn basing it on advice from the DPP. The court during the hearing heard that there was not enough evidence in relation to the matter.
However, during the first court appearance it was Mangru who had indicated that there was evidence against Gomez. In his submissions he said that the spent shell recovered after the shooting matched Gomez’s gun. He added that a post-mortem examination was performed and the warhead was taken for analysis.
Stabroek News sought clarity from the DPP’s Chambers on the decision made. Acting DPP Jo-Ann Barlow through the chambers’ public relations officer said that “the evidence was insufficient to support the offence of Murder and Manslaughter”. Efforts to ascertain whether the police had first sought the advice of the DPP before instituting the charge were futile. From all indications this standard protocol was not followed and as such the DPP would have made this recommendation after looking at the police file for the first time.
The abrupt end of this case has raised many concerns about the police force’s approach in certain investigations.
One security source questioned whether the police had sought the advice of their legal advisor, retired judge Claudette Singh before proceeding to charge Gomez and what “real” efforts were made to find witnesses.
According to the source, his information is that the warhead recovered from Isaacs’s head was “loose up” and as such no ballistic match could have been made. It was pointed out that the way the case was presented made little sense and more so highlighted poor attempts in gathering proper evidence.
Stabroek News was told that in the absence of a warhead police have equipment which could be used to test a weapon to see if it was recently fired. Additionally, there is testing for gunpowder residue and more importantly the source said is the conducting of ballistic tests on recovered spent shells.
“There is no other story to say that someone fired”, the source pointed out while adding that the absence of a witness would be a poor excuse. It was noted that the incident happened outside a night club where there would have been numerous persons. “You mean to say that the police could not get one person, to relate to them what had happened. It cannot happen without people seeing….what happened to the taxi driver who was at the centre of this whole thing. He just vanished?” the source asked before expressing confidence that investigators could have found solutions to these obstacles if they wanted to.
Further, it was stated that it makes little sense to charge someone when there is no witness or ballistic evidence linking them to the crime.
Police had said in a press release that the shooting occurred 25 minutes after midnight, when the driver of hire car HB 4024 accidentally collided with another vehicle that was parked on Main Street. “A licensed firearm holder who was in the vicinity confronted the driver and discharged several rounds in his direction,” the police said in a statement, while it noted that the shooter missed the driver and struck Isaacs to his head.
Why not manslaughter?
Vernon, Isaacs’s older brother told Stabroek News on Saturday that he would have felt satisfied if the charge of murder was withdrawn but a manslaughter charge instituted instead. He questioned how a court could let a man go when a life has been lost. “That is what we were expecting rather than just throwing it out”, he said, adding that the family heard of the development later in the day.
He said that when they heard that the case against Gomez was withdrawn by the court based on the advice of the DPP, “the whole family was surprised. The whole family was shocked”. Gomez and Isaacs, according to Vernon were “friends, very good friends”.
“I was made to understand that they didn’t have no witness and I was made to understand that the driver of the car, he was a witness and when was time now for the ID parade he said he can’t pick out the guy”, a visibly bothered Vernon, who lives abroad said.
He agreed that the recovery of a bullet from his brother’s body would have been enough to tie Gomez to the crime. “If not the witness, the bullet”, he stressed.
Asked if Gomez has made contact with relatives, he said they had indicated that he wanted to speak with Isaacs’ wife. “Unto now he hasn’t gotten to her. He tell me that he wants to see me. Well its four days now…” he said, adding that he is giving Gomez time.
Vernon told Stabroek News that he was not in Guyana when the shooting occurred but arrived here about six days later.
He related that based on his understanding there was some accident with hitting a car and someone went inside and called Isaacs and he went outside. He said that he was told that Gomez’s car was hit and Isaacs was talking with someone when Gomez came up. After querying who had hit his car, it is alleged that Gomez began firing shots and Isaacs was struck by a bullet, Vernon told Stabroek News.
He recalled that shortly after he came into the country, two policemen came and took statements from his sister and Isaacs’s wife and promised to “get back (to us). Nobody never get back”. Vernon said that the statements taken had to do with when last they saw Nigel among other issues.
Not the end
Vernon expressed confidence that this would not be the end of the matter and that at some point the family will get justice.
He said too that he is disappointed with the police as well as the whole judicial system as they have all failed in ensuring that justice was served. He said that he doesn’t think pursuing justice is a waste of time but he pointed out that the family will have to consult to decide what steps will be taken.
The two brothers last spoke on the day of the shooting and it would be a memorable conversation for Vernon. Based on what he said, Isaacs never expressed any concerns about being around Gomez.
Vernon stated too that neither the police nor the DPP ever informed the family that the matter had come to an end. “Nobody told us nothing. Nobody said nothing…but a life was lost. The next thing was free”, he stressed.
