At the trial of Sean Dos Santos and Stephon Howard who are accused of the 2017 murder of Abdool Fazal Saheed, the court heard of Dos Santos allegedly telling investigators that it was he and his co-accused who shot and killed Saheed at the Lot 194 Freeman Street pre-mises which they also burgled.
That was the testimony yesterday of Assistant Superintendent (ASP) Jermaine Grant who said that Dos Santos gave investigators an oral confession detailing his and Howard’s involvement in the crime.
Defence attorney Konyo Sandiford, however, who represents both accused, disputed the account given by Grant, stating that Dos Santos never made any such statement to police, but rather had only told them that he had nothing to do with the crime and knew nothing about it.
Dos Santos and Howard are currently on trial before Justice Jo-Ann Barlow and a jury at the High Court in Demerara.
The indictment against them is that they murdered Saheed in the wee hours of September 24th, 2017 in the furtherance of a robbery.
Following the commencement of the trial last month, the Court subsequently become engaged in a voir dire
which concluded on Tuesday, allowing for the resumption of the main trial yesterday.
In his testimony, Grant said that after being taken into custody, Dos Santos indicated to police that he had previously lied and wanted to tell them the truth about what had really transpired on the night in question.
In the presence of Corporal Etwaroo at the Brickdam Police Station, Grant said that Dos Santos then related, “Sir, hear wah happen. Ah lie. Ah gon tell yuh de truth. I went pon the corner yesterday and hear me soldier dem talking that dem Indian people in me area…some ah dem come in de country fuh do dead wuk and deh gat jewellery and foreign money.”
Grant told the court that Dos Santos then went on to relate contacting Howard after which they collected a gun from a person who Grant said Dos Santos identified by the name “Shaquille.”
The court heard from ASP Grant that thereafter, Dos Santos and Howard fired off two shots from the weapon after “smoking a joint on the dam.”
According to Grant, Dos Santos then related that they proceeded to the Saheed home at 194 Freeman Street, gaining access through an empty lot on the dam aback the premises from which they jumped the fence.
Grant said Dos Santos then went on to relate that they saw the front door open, through which they went and first encountered three women in the kitchen, whom they instructed to lie on the ground.
ASP Grant said that Dos Santos further related that he instructed Howard to watch the women, while he ventured to the living room where he was confronted by another occupant of the house who pelted a chair at him; and he was being rushed by another two.
“Ah shoot dem and pull off deh gold ring,” Grant said Dos Santos told police.
According to Grant, Dos Santos then related that Howard at that point ran into the bedroom where he picked up a bag and they both then ran outside, jumped the back fence and escaped.
ASP Grant said that prior to giving the statement, Dos Santos had been cautioned in accordance with the Judge’s Rules that he was not obliged to say anything and that anything he said may be put in writing and given in evidence against him.
He said that the accused had also been told of his right to have a relative, friend or his attorney present while he made the statement, but he forfeited that right.
Grant said that at no time did he or Etwaroo force, make any threats, promises or hold out any inducements to Dos Santos for him to give the statement he did, but noted that he (Dos Santos), after making the statement, told the lawmen that he would “not be signing to anything.”
According to Grant, the accused said he only merely wanted them to know what had happened.
Disputing Grant’s testimony, Sandiford under cross-examination extensively grilled him as to the reason police had not made use of video-recording of the confession statement he alleged Dos Santos had given.
Grant accepted that the Guyana Police Force at the time had the capacity to facilitate such recording.
Pressed as to why this technology was not utilized, he said that he had made a request for the video camera to be brought from the Criminal Investigations Department to the Brickdam Police Station, but was unsuccessful.
“That is a lie,” the lawyer asserted; but Grant said it was the truth.
Disputing that her client ever confessed to the crime, Sandiford asked Grant whether video-recording would not have been a way to counteract a defendant’s later denial of things police may claim they might have said.
“No,” was Grant’s response.
Also testifying yesterday was brother of the deceased, Abdool Shalim Saheed, who said that it was the accused—Dos Santos and Howard—who had invaded their home and attacked his family on the morning in question, killing his brother.
While Shalim steadfastly contended that it was the duo who killed Fazal during the ordeal in which himself and other brother Abdool Alim Saheed were also shot, he could not provide specific details of the description of the alleged attackers.
Shalim who testified virtually from overseas admitted to Sandiford under cross-examination that he had only told the police that the attackers were “male, (Afro-Guyanese), dark in complexion and about five feet seven inches tall.”
Pressed, he further agreed with Sandiford’s suggestion that given the general nature of the descriptions he provided, he could well have been describing very many other males in Guyana.
Grilled about specific facial features of the men he said attacked his family after their face coverings had come off, Shalim was unable to provide answers, stating he did not know that all those “fine, fine details would come up now.”
When asked, he told Sandiford that he did not provide those details to police either, as he was never asked.
Sandiford, however, enquired from Shalim whether he did not know that it would be important in his description to the police of his attackers, to have included those details which he omitted.
Shalim answered in the affirmative but held to his explanation that the police had not made such enquires from him.
Also testifying yesterday was Detective Sergeant Chaitram Sewsankar who told the court that both Shalim and Alim had “positively” identified the accused duo as the attackers.
Sandiford, however, advanced that the manner in which the identification parade on which her clients were picked out, was unfairly conducted as the other persons who participated in the parade did not have similar physical characters as required by law, to that of her clients.
The detective, however, contended that the parade was fairy conducted and that all the participants had similar in physical attributes to the accused.
Pathologist Dr. Nehaul Singh was also among the witnesses who testified yesterday.
He said that after conducting an autopsy, he found the cause of Fazal’s death to have been multiple gunshot injuries to his chest and abdomen.
The trial continues this morning at 9:30.
In her opening address at the commencement of the trial, Prosecutor Cicelia Corbin said that on that fateful morning of the shooting, the Saheed family was immersed in preparations for the memorial of their patriarch, when they were pounced upon by bandits who invaded their home.
Corbin had said that little did the unsuspecting family know, the peace of their night, would be shattered and transformed into funeral arrangements for a loved one.
She had said that Shalim and Alim who had been shot and later admitted to hospital, had earlier arrived in Guyana along with a sister, for their father’s memorial service.
