Latest update January 8th, 2025 4:30 AM
Mar 19, 2009 News
In the wake of the recent plea bargain by Guyanese businessman Roger Khan in a Brooklyn court, President Bharrat Jagdeo has once again distanced himself from the self-confessed drug trafficker.
Speaking to reporters yesterday, the Guyanese leader dismissed the presumption that his government is in some way linked to the activities of Khan.
This is in the wake of statements made by Khan that he had used his personal resources to help the Guyana Government in its fight against criminal activities perpetrated by a gang of gunmen following the 2002 jailbreak.
On Monday, Khan pleaded guilty to all charges leveled against him in the United States of America, and the prosecution in the Eastern District Circuit Court in Brooklyn has agreed to a 15-year sentence offered during a plea bargain.
The matter was to have gone to trial next month, and Khan faced life imprisonment on conviction. There had been calls for an investigation into the activities of a ‘phantom’ gang which was allegedly headed by Khan and which was fingered in the execution of several criminal suspects.
A Commission of Inquiry was then established into the killings following revelations by self confessed ‘phantom squad’ member Shafeek Bacchus.
Bacchus had alleged that former Minister of Home Affairs, Ronald Gajraj had given tacit approval for the operations of the ‘phantom squad’.
President Jagdeo told media operatives that he had never put any score on what Roger Khan said in the past. This is not the first time that the Jagdeo administration has disassociated itself from Roger Khan.
The President gave the impression that most of the claims made by Khan are false.
“As I said before, Roger Khan has said several things. He had said that Felix (former Police Commissioner) was undermining the government too. He said that he had taped conversations with people, sharing information, who are linked to drug dealers.
“I have never put any score to what Khan had said in the past. I never decided whether he was guilty or not guilty, so if he’s guilty he’d have to face the consequences. That is clear,” the President reiterated.
Two political leaders have announced that the recent developments in the matter have vindicated their positions that the Jagdeo government had links to Khan and his drug running operations.
Recent transcripts from an informant in the Khan case had revealed that the confessed drug dealer had introduced him to a serving government minister, who he later approached to assist the embattled businessman.
But President Jagdeo has dismissed their position, claiming that he has never met with Roger Khan, nor does he have any knowledge that any of his Ministers were in contact with Khan during his time in Guyana.
“I don’t know about that but I never had any contact with him,” the Guyanese leader said. Meanwhile, Police Commissioner Henry Greene insisted yesterday that the police are in possession of a surveillance laptop computer that was seized from Khan by the army in 2003.
“We have a spy equipment or whatever you may call it. We are preserving it as evidence,” Greene said, declining to comment further.
Recent reports out of the United States indicated that law enforcement authorities there had retrieved a surveillance computer that was shipped from Guyana, from the offices of Khan’s former attorney Robert Simels, who is facing charges relating to the tampering of witnesses in the drug case.
President Jagdeo said that the computer seized by the US authorities is not the same one that the Guyanese law enforcement officials have in their possession, since he was assured that local law enforcers still have the seized computer in their possession.
“It could be that there are several pieces of the same equipment. How do we know it is ‘the’ equipment? If this guy could have bought one equipment, he could have bought several,” President Jagdeo argued.
The Ministry of Home Affairs had previously denied claims that the government had authorised Khan’s importation of a sensitive piece of electronic equipment and its seizure by the Joint Services.
And in an invited comment, Crime Chief Seelall Persaud told reporters that he has not seen the full transcripts of statements given by witnesses in the Roger Khan case but should those documents be properly presented to the local police there will be a full investigation.
“Certainly! If those transcripts are clear that crime occurred in Guyana, they will be investigated, it has to come officially, then it is authentic,” the Crime Chief said.
But recent utterances by President Jagdeo suggested that drug officials in the United States are reluctant to cooperate with their local counterparts.
In 2006, Suriname police arrested Khan and three ex-policemen, Sean Belfield, Paul Rodrigues and Lloyd Roberts.
Khan was ordered deported, but instead of being transported to the border with Guyana, he was flown to Trinidad where the authorities refused to grant him permission to land. Agents of the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) immediately arrested him and shipped him to the USA on a charge of masterminding large shipments of illegal drugs to that country.
Khan had initially pleaded not guilty to 18 counts of drug-possession and drug-distribution charges, which alleged that he imported, conspired to import and distribute, and possessed cocaine for the purpose of distribution on a number of dates between 2001 and 2006.
He was also charged for being part of an international distribution conspiracy.
Jan 08, 2025
The Telegraph – The England & Wales Cricket Board will meet with officials from the International Cricket Council at the end of January to discuss plans for a radical new two-tier system in...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- The Horse Racing Authority Bill of 2024, though ostensibly aimed at regulating horse racing... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- It has long been evident that the world’s richest nations, especially those responsible... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]