The lawyers for Guyanese murder accused Marcus Bisram have filed a petition to have their arguments reheard in an appeal of a New York district court’s order to extradite him to Guyana, where he is due to stand trial for murder.
Last month, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirm-ed the judgement of the district court.
Bisram, a dual citizen of the United States of America and Guyana, currently faces a charge of murder in Guyana for an incident which occurred on the night of October 31st, 2016.
Bisram is accused of ordering the fatal beating of Faiyaz Narinedatt, a young father of two.
However, Bisram’s attorneys are now arguing that a rehearing should be granted because the appeal panel “erred in finding that Bisram had the opportunity to present all the evidence of a witness recantation at the extradition proceedings.” They are also arguing that a rehearing should be granted “because the panel misunderstood Bisram’s argument and overlooked key evidence establishing the lack of reliability of a witness’ purported statement.”
According to the petition, Bisram does not argue that a main witness’ version of events should be credited over another but rather that any of the said witness’ related evidence is unreliable and thus cannot support a probable cause finding.
They are also claiming that the purported statement is no more reliable than the said witness’ testimony at the Preliminary Inquiry into the charge.
Additionally, they are arguing that a rehearing should be granted because “the panel erred in concluding that the remaining evidence is sufficient to establish probable cause.”
On February 14th, 2017, following an investigation into Narinedatt’s death, Guyana submitted a formal request to the United States Department of State for Bisram’s extradition to face a charge of murder, after the accused had fled overseas.
However, on October 12th, 2017, a magistrate judge in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York issued a Certificate of Extraditability, certifying to the Secretary of State that there was probable cause to believe that Bisram committed the charged murder and authorising the Secretary’s extradition of Bisram to Guyana.
On November 17th, 2017, Bisram filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, challenging the Certificate of Extraditability.
On October 31st, 2018, following several extensions, the district court denied Bisram’s petition, concurring in the magistrate judge’s determination that there was “reasonable ground” to believe that Bisram committed the murder as charged.
Then Bisram, through his attorneys, appealed the district court’s denial of his habeas petition on the grounds that the evidence presented to the extradition court failed to establish a reasonable ground to believe that Bisram committed the charged murder, especially in light of a witness’ subsequent alleged recantation of his original statement to police and that Bisram received constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel during the extradition and habeas proceedings.
“We agree with all three reasons the district court gave for declining to issue a writ of habeas corpus to Bisram on the basis of (a witness’) alleged recantation. At a minimum, we cannot say that the district court erred in concluding that the evidence submitted by Guyana surpassed the minimal threshold of `any evidence warranting the finding that there was a reasonable ground to believe the accused guilty’,” the US Appeals Court said last month.
“We have considered all of Bisram’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court,” it added.
The decision was issued by circuit judges Dennis Jacobs, Debra Ann Livingston and Joseph F Bianco.
