Latest update November 8th, 2024 1:00 AM
Latest News
Absence of foreign pathologist forces prosecution to close case
– Bridgette Gangadin murder PI
The prosecution has closed its case in the Preliminary Inquiry into the Dwarka Gangadin murder preliminary inquiry. He is accused of killing his wife Brigette Gangadin.
Prosecutor, Inspector Lloyd Thomas, closed the case despite the absence of the testimony of overseas- based Pathologist, Professor Hubert Daisley.
Bridgette Gangadin
Daisley, who had performed a second autopsy on the body was to be brought to Guyana to testify about his findings which showed that the deceased suffered some sort of strangulation.
The matter is being heard before Magistrate Sherdel Issacs-Marcus at the Vigilance Magistrate’s Court.
The Magistrate will soon have to make her ruling on whether a prima facie case has been made out by the prosecution for the matter to be tried before a jury.
She had heard after several witnesses including the couple’s two children gave testimonies.
Initially, the accused, grass track champion rider, who is being represented by Senior Counsel Bernard De Santos, was facing traffic charges resulting from the incident after a local Pathologist, Dr. Nehaul Singh, found that the woman died from a fractured skull.
His findings were said to be consistent with the version of events that the dead woman’s husband had given to investigators.
Gangadin had told police that his wife fell out of the truck and he later admitted that he failed to render assistance to her after the rear wheels of the vehicle ran over her head.
The woman’s body was discovered on the Vigilance Public Road, a few yards from the gate of the Vigilance Police Station compound.
Relatives of the dead woman were not satisfied with the local Pathologist’s findings, and they eventually obtained the services of a foreign Pathologist for a second opinion.
That opinion from Professor Hubert Daisley, found that there was evidence to suggest that Bridgette Gangadin was strangled and this led to the institution of the murder charge against the accused.
Earlier, Defence Counsel De Santos had contested the legality of Bridgette’s relatives’ actions in obtaining the services of a foreign pathologist, for a second opinion into the matter.
De Santos had argued that the dead woman’s relatives will have to prove that their actions of obtaining a second autopsy was lawful in accordance with Section 43 of the Evidence Act while emphasizing that there was no authority from a Coroner for them to “deal with the body”.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
A lesson from the bread lines of America
…Peeping Tom Kaieteur News- If the American elections of 2024 delivered any one lesson to the rest of the world, it... more
Rising Gun Crimes in the Caribbean: Urgent Action required by all
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – There is an alarming surge in gun-related violence, particularly among younger... more
Weekend Cartoon
