Linden Commission of Inquiry…Enough circumstantial evidence that police shot- Nigel Hughes

Nov 03, 2012 News

---

 

Minutes into the hearing, yesterday, Justice Claudette Singh inquired from the Chairman, former Jamaican Judge Lensley Wolfe if the secretary of the commission should extend the courtesy to invite attorney-at-law Nigel Hughes to present his summation.
Wolfe made it clear that he would have no part of that, adding that he did not believe the Commission ought to be doing that.
“They need to pay attention to the sensitivities of this issue. I live in Guyana and I know,” she said to no one in particular. Commissioner Dana Seetahal, commenting on the matter, said that it was up to the attorney and not for the bench to decide.
Attorney at Law Basil Williams then said that he had spoken to the leader of the Alliance for Change and that there were attempts to have Hughes return.

Hughes later returned to the afternoon’s sitting and made his summations.
Nigel Hughes said that there is compelling evidence to prove that the police shot the three deceased and injured the Lindeners. He added that the deceased and injured persons were all shot with 00 buckshot pellets. The injured were in excess of 20 persons.
The lawyer said that the pellets could only have been discharged from a shotgun and not a handgun or rifle.  Hughes said that that eliminated the possibility of either a concealed weapon or sniper being present.
He said that a shotgun is at least three feet in length and hence would have been clearly visible at the time of the shooting. Hughes said that there were around several hundred persons present at the time of the shooting and the only persons who were seen with shot guns were three police officers.
Superintendent Todd, who was in charge, admitted that he discharged several rounds from shotguns which he took from various ranks that were on the police line in uniform. Todd further said that he was the only one who discharged the shotgun.
Hughes said that evidence shows that no witness whether civilian or police claimed to have seen anyone else but the police armed with a shotgun. He said that ballistics expert Dr. Mark Robinson, testified that from the fact that the deceased died from single pellet shots meant they had to be some 30 to 40 yards away from the shooter.
Hughes noted that Todd’s testimony confirms that he was within that distance when he fired the shotgun .Todd testified that he shot to the ground in an attempt to cause the pellets to ricochet. The U.K. ballistic expert, local ballistic expert Sergeant Ian Jackson and the police investigator who visited the scene the next morning all testified that there was no evidence of any ricochet on the ground or did the pellets show that they were fired ricochet.
Hughes said that the position from which the persons were shot was consistent with the position from which the police said they fired. The witness Todd admitted firing at least four times at the crowd yet no one in the crowd was injured with the official # 04 and # 06 pellets which are issued by the police.
The lawyer said that would mean on Todd’s evidence they should all be buried in the ground or had fallen short of the crowd.
“The unaccounted gunman would have had to have fired repeatedly at the crowd and not be seen” Hughes suggested. The lawyer further suggested that the police claim that they heard four loud explosions coming from the bridge.
Assuming for the purpose of argument that this was our missing shooter armed with a shotgun on the bridge then several people in the crowd on the bridge would have been shot.
“”The bridge was jammed pack so no space for 20 to 30 feet clear distance to allow a single shot to cause the death of protestors,” Hughes said.
The lawyer said that the  only basis on which the police claim it is not their officers who killed the protestors is that they don’t issue 00 double buckshot cartridges. He said that is the equivalent of a shooter standing over the body of a person who had just been shot and claiming that he did not shoot because he does not have the type of bullets which was found in the body of the deceased but his weapons is capable of firing that same type of bullet.
Hughes said that it was officer Rodney who was issued with a shotgun who said he never knows what type of cartridges are issued to him when he uplifts his shot gun. The ballistic results for the Linden weapons are not available since they were never sent to be tested.
The lawyer said that someone on the police line armed with a shotgun discharged 00 double buckshot cartridge hence the cause of death of three persons. He suggested that they probably had a gunman armed with a shotgun located somewhere where no one saw him.
Hughes explained that for a gunman to be armed at the bridge and causing the death, they would have had to be about 30 yards from the gunman to sustain injury. He said that the practical reality of that is if a gunman is on the bridge where several hundred are standing and he discharges a shotgun that results in the death of three persons, either the crowd parted for the pellet to go in direction of persons, or he was much taller than the crowd or elevated on the bridge so he can hit someone 30 yards away.
In the Linmine compound, same facts would apply, Hughes said since the credible facts are not consistent with someone standing in a crowd with shotgun that is not seen and not injuring several people around them.
On the issue of Ministerial involvement in the events, Hughes said that one should not be distracted by the claim that the phone records don’t show contact before the shooting. He said that evidence shows that  Minister Rohee testified that on July 17, he had at least a 25-minute meeting with the Commissioner of Police Leroy Brumell, Seelall Persaud and Clifton Hicken at his office about the protest which was scheduled for the next day.
He testified that he tried getting the police commissioner after the incident and he spoke with Brumell but could not get details of what transpired. He tried again could not get onto him and that’s why he called Hicken six times, two hours later.
Attorney at law Basil Williams, who represented APNU, said that July 18 would go down in the history books as one of the saddest days in Guyana, when peaceful protestors were shot and killed by the police.
Williams said that the evidence points to the police and no one else. According to the lawyer there was a prior plan to derail the five-day protest for which the Lindeners were given permission.
Williams said that certain persons helped to derail the protest. He said that it was Commander Clifton Hicken who threatened the Regional Chairman Sharma Solomon and Council Member Gordon Callender.
Williams contended that Commander Hicken had breached his duty when he failed to clear the bridge earlier in the day. He said that Hicken came back down under the cover of dark so that his plan to derail the protest would succeed.
The lawyer said that there is no coincidence that there was “blackout” just before the shooting. “The blackout, the threats acted in accordance with a prior plan,” Williams suggested to the commission.
Williams said that they have a serious problem with Sergeant Stanton’s diary. Some high powered rifles were uplifted and then when they were handed back they had short ammunitions. He said that there was no record of who uplifted these weapons.
The lawyer said that these were lame excuses and he urged the commissioners to take this into a serious consideration.
Williams said that there needs to be an independent pathology unit. He also made reference to the Police Complaints Authority as useless and urged them to do something which could help this.
There is the expectation of the commission that by the time there are finished, the recommendations will result in a better value of Human life and the need for protocol of law in the country where there is a lot of public security.

---

---