A look at some matters in which Voir dires were conducted

Aug 22, 2021 News

---

By Renay Sambach

Kaieteur News – A Voir dire is conducted to ascertain if the evidence that was given by an accused was given voluntarily or if violence was use to obtain the evidence.

Voir dires are often conducted in murder trials in the High Court. It is believed that Magistrates should conduct Voir dire to determine the admissibility of certain confessions during a high profile Preliminary Inquiry (PI) into a charge of murder or other indictable cases. Essentially, a Voir dire is a trial within a trial.
In order for a Magistrate to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to commit a defendant to stand trial before a judge and jury, a PI or the paper committal process is used.
However, if the evidence in the matter is based on a confession statement, a Voir dire should be conducted to ascertain if it was given on a voluntary basis.
As such, in this edition of The Court Journal, I will highlight court matters in which Voir dires were conducted.
In 2019, a Voir dire was conducted into the Samantha Point handyman’s murder. In that matter, Khemraj Persaud and Heeman Gocool were on remand for allegedly murdering their drinking buddy, Rohan Persaud.
This was done after Gocool had alleged that the police used violence on him to gather evidence and force him to admit to the offence. As such, a Voir dire was conducted to gather the relevant evidence of Gocool’s allegation.
This matter was heard in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Courts before Principal Magistrate, Faith McGusty.
The charge stated that on February 13, 2019, at Samantha Point, Grove, East Bank Demerara, the duo murdered 53-year-old Persaud, a handyman.

On November 21, 2019, the duo was committed to stand trial in the High Court for the murder. On that date, Principal Magistrate McGusty ruled that having considered the prosecution’s evidence, the court is of the opinion that a sufficient case had been made out against the defendants. Hence, they were committed to stand trial at the next practicable sitting of the Demerara Assizes.
It was reported that, Persaud also known as ‘Ravi’ and ‘Kanhai,’ of Samantha Point, Grove, East Bank Demerara, confronted the two accused, who are said to be his friends, after learning that a woman they drank with was also having sexual relationships with them. As a result of the confrontation, the men reportedly got into a fight.
The police had reported that Persaud was slain between 01:00 and 06:30hrs. on February 13, 2019, at Back Street, Grove Housing Scheme, East Bank Demerara. His body was found bearing a stab wound to the lower abdomen.
According to reports, neighbours of Back Street, Grove Housing Scheme, told investigators that Persaud was seen around 18:00hrs. on February 12, 2019, drinking with two men at a nearby culvert.
In another matter, a Voir dire was conducted in the Lusignan massacre trial during 2013. The murder trial for Mark Royden Williams called ‘Smallie,’ and James Anthony Hyles known as ‘Sally,’ commenced in July 2013. The duo was accused of being part of a gun-toting crew that slaughtered 11 persons in the early morning hours of January 26, 2008.

A Voir dire was conducted after the defence for the two men brought to the court’s attention several issues that could negatively affect their case. In that matter the defence had spoken about witnesses and their credibility and circumstances under which they had given evidence. However, in the High Court, during the Voir dire aspect, the 12-member jury must be excluded.
In 2018, the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) restored the 2013 acquittals of Hyles and Williams for their alleged involvement in what has been dubbed the ‘Lusignan Massacre,’ despite substantial procedural errors at trial.
Hyles was released, but Williams, however, was not due to the fact that he was sentenced to death after being convicted four years ago for his role in the 2008 Bartica massacre in which 12 men — including three police officers were killed.
In 2015, Justice, Brassington Reynolds, found that the caution statement by accused Shakir Mohamed, in the Shewraney Doobay murder trial was freely and voluntarily given to the police.
According to the caution statement, the accused had told the police that the killer was Mark Singh, who because of some financial problem with his aunt who had him paying rates and taxes, he had murdered her.

It was reported that the caution statement that landed Mohamed in trouble came after a copy of a caution statement that Singh had made to the police, was handed to him.
After reading Singh’s caution statement, Mohamed wrote his own statement and dictated same to the police under caution and in the presence of a witness.
The charge had stated that on May 24, 2011, the duo murdered Doobay, 58, called “Monica” in the course or furtherance of a robbery. The woman was discovered lying in a pool of blood on the kitchen floor of her Lot 19 Echilibar Villas, Campbellville, Georgetown home.
Mohamed had been jointly charged with Doobay’s nephew, Singh, who subsequently died. Early in 2016, Mohamed was freed of the charge but the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP), Shalimar Ali-Hack, S.C., filed legal proceedings appealing the decision.

 

 

 

---

---