As had been expected, Jones Raymond, the man who was freed back in July after spending almost a decade on remand awaiting trial for murder without even being indicted, has brought an action against the State in which he seeking $3M in compensation for what he says is breach of several of his fundamental rights.
Through his battery of attorneys, the man is seeking declarations from the Supreme Court that his fundamental constitutional right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time had been violated by the State.
Listing the Attorney General as the Defendant in his statement of claim (SoC), Raymond is asking the Court to declare that his remand in both the Camp Street and Lusignan Prisons for in excess of nine years without a trial, contravened his right to secure protection of the law.
Equally, he says that his right to protection from inhuman treatment had been contravened.
Against this background he says that the conditions under which he was kept in both prisons were themselves “unlawful,” as they were “inhumane and degrading.”
Raymond said that while an inmate at the Camp Street Prison for more than eight years, he was kept in a crowded cell measuring approximately 15 feet x 20 feet, with at least 17 other inmates. The cell he said, “Contained two toilets, of which often only one was functional and one bathroom to be shared by the said inmates therein;” adding that “the said toilet was often clogged and reeked of an unbearable stench.”
He said that the cell was “hot, filthy, and smelled deplorable,” adding that because of overcrowding there were insufficient cots, as a result of which he “often slept on the floor of the cell.”
Raymond said too, that “almost every other day, there was no running water in the cells, which meant that [he] and other inmates were often unable to bathe and care of their hygiene.”
He complains, too, that one January 2013 night, his foot was set on fire on five different occasions by unknown inmates, as well as his chest. According to him, he was “was not protected from these atrocities from Prison Guards or otherwise.”
He said that following the 2017 fire which gutted the Camp Street Prison, he and other inmates were then relocated to the Lusignan Prison where conditions were also deplorable, as they were kept in “an open pasture with no shelter, running water and other facilities for the first seven days.”
For that entire week, he said that they lived and slept on the ground in the open field “exposed to the elements and had no place to shelter from the sun or rain.” He then goes on to detail in his claim, “it rained on about three separate occasions…the field was muddy, swampy, flooded when it rained and inundated with snakes and frogs.”
Raymond then next deposed that following a riot which erupted at the Lusignan Prison in 2017, though he was not a participant therein, he was “shot with pellets on five occasions by police officers” brought in to quell the unrest.
Raymond said that he “has been traumatized,” by the conditions under which he was kept at both prisons.
For the alleged breaches, he is seeking compensation in excess of three million dollars.
Through his battery of attorneys led by Senior Counsel Timothy Jonas, Raymond is also asking the Court to grant exemplary, aggravated, punitive and all other costs it deems just to grant.
Raymond in an interview following his release had spoken of what he described to be a harrowing experience he was made to endure in prison for the almost decade he had spent on remand awaiting trial for murder, though he had not even been indicated.
Background
The sails were adjusted in his turbulent journey when High Court Judge Sandil Kissoon determined that after being on remand for more than nine years, his fundamental rights under Article 144 (1) of the Constitution had been grossly violated.
In so finding, the Judge ordered that the capital charge previously levelled against him be permanently stayed and that he be released forthwith from the custody of the Guyana Prison Service.
The Judge lamented as being “unthinkable” the constitutional violation he said that was meted out to Raymond.
In tears Raymond had described the conditions in prison as unbearable, stating that it was only his faith that kept him.
Following his release, he had told the media that his experience on remand was a frustrating one, which he felt he could not endure any longer. Fighting to hold back tears, Raymond exclaimed “I get poison. I get shot.”
He lamented the food which he described as being below par, as “slush.”
Seemingly intent on looking forward to the life ahead of him, however, Raymond had said he relied on God and prayers to see him through and was happy to have finally been freed.
“I am lucky today,” he had said, while adding that he was happy to also see his children.
His attorney at the time Teriq Mohammed had said that a civil suit against the State for the violation against his client’s fundamental rights was very likely.
The lawyer had opined that had the matter not come up at all, “he would have stayed in jail and languished away.”
Mohammed said that with his client being of Amerindian descent “I feel like they don’t have the representation they truly need.”
Against this background he expressed the belief that had no one taken on Raymond’s case, he believes he would have still been in prison.
“The only way I can sum it up is justice delayed is justice denied,” Mohammed had said.
Grave tragedy
Raymond was accused of murdering Gary Joseph with an arrow and bow sometime between December 26 and December 27, 2012. He was remanded to prison on December 28, 2012 and had remained in jail until he was freed by Justice Kissoon on July 15.
Article 141 (1) says “If any person is charged with a criminal offence, then, unless the charge is withdrawn, the case shall be afforded a fair hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial court established by law.”
Justice Kissoon had pointed out that Raymond spent nine years, six months and 18 days on remand, which is equivalent to 13 prison years. All of this occurred while he was clothed with the presumption of innocence.
Justice Kissoon told his court that in Raymond’s case a “grave tragedy” occurred and the injustice was not the singular cause for concern but also the “gross dereliction” that was meted out to an accused, who was voiceless as he was unrepresented.
Making reference to the statement allegedly given to the police by Raymond following his arrest, Justice Kissoon said the man stated that he was at home when his son went to him covered in blood with an injury to his throat. The child told his father that the injury was inflicted by Joseph and he became upset and collected his bow and arrow and went in search of the man, whom he found drinking at a shop.
He allegedly spoke to Joseph who attempted to run and Raymond said he shot him twice with the bow and arrow.
He was charged in 2012 with murder and was later committed to stand trial.
According to the Judge, months after the committal and the depositions from the preliminary inquiry (PI) were sent to the office of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) in April of 2015, a letter was sent by the DPP to the presiding magistrate to correct “identifiable” mistakes.
The Judge said that having examined the directives sent to the magistrate by the DPP it raised questions about the committal by the magistrate but he noted that this was not an issue in the context of which he gave his decision.
He pointed out that seven years after the directive of the DPP, the presiding magistrate, who he did not name, had failed to comply and an order in relation to the matter given by his court last year had also not been acted upon.
The Magistrate who conducted the preliminary inquiry was Allan Wilson.
The matter was brought to the attention of Justice Kissoon during jail delivery by the Superintendent of Prisons, who pointed out the delay and conditions under which Raymond remained on remand.
He described the violation of Raymond’s fundamental rights as “striking” and a failure of the criminal justice system. And if it was not for the prison service the court would not have been made aware of Raymond’s case.
The Chambers of the DPP in a statement would then say that he was never indicted, since additional evidence requested from the Magistrate who presided over the PI into the charge was never presented.
“The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) wishes to state that there was no indictment for Raymond Jones [Jones Raymond],” the DPP’s statement had said; before adding that between 2015 and 2021, three requests were made to the Magistrate for additional evidence but none was ever presented.
