Legal firestorm erupts over charges against MV Barima captain, crew members

Jul 29, 2026 News

---

….lawyers say charges threaten COI

(Kaieteur News) – The 72 murder charges instituted against the captain and two crew members of the ill-fated MV Barima have drawn sharp criticisms from members of the local legal fraternity, who are contending that charging the trio with murder raises serious legal concerns and could possibly undermine the Commission of Inquiry (COI) established to investigate Guyana’s deadliest maritime disaster.

After appearing in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court for Captain Kevin Price, known as “KP”, Chief Mate Rondell Dwayne Roberts and Goods Superintendent Delon Granderson, defence attorney Dexter Todd told reporters that he believes the charges stemming from the 18^th July MV Barima tragedy, which left more than 70 people confirmed dead and at least 30 others still missing at sea, should have been preceded by the findings of the Commission of Inquiry (COI) recently established by President Irfaan Ali.

“The police have done what the commission of inquiry is supposed to do and they have already come to a definitive conclusion on this matter,” Todd said.

He labelled the charges “unfair” and “injustice”, contending that given the complexity of the matter, a proper investigation could not have been completed in such a short period. To this end, he disclosed that he has requested early disclosure of the prosecution’s evidence in the case.

The lawyer noted that several experts are still needed to assist in the investigation, adding that this underscores the importance of the COI. “The primary person who will have to talk at the COI, is the captain of the vessel he will have to appear before a COI. Now this man is in prison and then you’re going to have a second issue. There’s something we call subjudice, meaning that if a matter is before one court, then not even a commission can look into the affairs of that matter. So, there are going to be barriers to the extent that the commission can dive into things,” he added. However, this concern was addressed in a statement issued by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, which said that although the impending COI may overlap with the criminal proceedings, both processes can proceed simultaneously.

Further, Todd also questioned comments by authorities suggesting that the sunken MV Barima could remain on the seabed. “There is a clear pronouncement yesterday, and the fears of the Guyanese people, we may not even see the boat back on water. So, my thing is, how do they hope to establish the weight of that boat?”

Meanwhile, attorney Nigel Hughes sharply criticised the decision to charge the captain and two crew members of the ill-fated MV Barima with murder, describing the move as “a most perverse attempt at distraction” in the wake of the maritime disaster.

In a strongly worded statement, posted on his Facebook page, Hughes argued that the charges raise serious legal questions and could have the unintended—or intended—effect of preventing the accused from giving evidence before the Commission of Inquiry (COI) into the tragedy.

“A charge of murder requires that the accused had the intention to kill the victim,” Hughes said. “In the circumstances of this charge, it would mean that when they set sail, the accused intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to every person on board, or that they developed that intention at some stage after the voyage began.”

Hughes questioned whether the murder charges were instead designed to ensure that the captain and crew remain silent during the inquiry.

“Could it be that the real intention here is that, having been charged with murder, the accused would be unable to testify before the Commission of Inquiry, since any testimony they give can be used against them at a criminal trial?” he asked.

According to Hughes, the prosecution risks undermining the search for answers by effectively removing key witnesses from the inquiry process.

“Perhaps we have the unique ability to compound what is already a tragedy of epic proportions into an additional manifest injustice by instituting murder charges and thereby silencing key witnesses before the Commission of Inquiry,” Hughes said.

Further, attorney Darren Wade also questioned the decision, saying that he sees “mischief” in the laying of the murder charges. In a Facebook post, Wade contended that charging the captain and the other crew members with murder is legally unsustainable.

Examining the essential elements of the offence of murder, particularly the requirement of malice aforethought, Wade said serious questions arise as to whether those charges can withstand judicial scrutiny. “The requirement of malice aforethought is what distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide,” he noted.

Addressing concerns raised by members of the public over why the men were not charged with manslaughter instead of the capital offence, Wade said he agrees that manslaughter may be the more appropriate consideration, depending upon the evidence. “I do not yet have all of the facts, and I cannot speak to matters that remain under investigation,” Wade cautioned.

However, he said that if the evidence ultimately supports manslaughter or criminal negligence, liability would not necessarily have been limited to the captain and crew. He noted that it could also have extended to senior government officials, public officers, regulators, executives and others whose acts or omissions may have materially contributed to the tragedy.

Wade also questioned the timing of the murder charges instead of allowing investigators to determine whether manslaughter or other offences were more appropriate. “Is the institution of murder charges having the effect of shielding senior officials from closer scrutiny by focusing public attention almost exclusively on the Captain and crew? That is a question the Guyanese people are entitled to ask,” he said.

He further questioned what happens if the murder charges ultimately fail because the legal ingredients of the offence cannot be proved. According to Wade, the public discourse would then have centred on charges that were never capable of being sustained, while the broader issues of systemic negligence, regulatory failures and the potential criminal and civil liability of those responsible for the management, maintenance, inspection and continued operation of the ferry may receive less attention than they deserve.

“We must not lose sight of the real issue. The question is not only who was operating the vessel on the day of the tragedy. The question is who made the decisions, who ignored the warnings, who permitted the vessel to continue operating, and whether those persons should also be held accountable under the civil and criminal law. Make no mistake: these murder charges are legally nonsensical. They are an insult to the criminal law, an affront to justice, and a disservice to the families who deserve genuine accountability,” he added.

Meanwhile, amid widespread criticism over the decision to institute murder charges, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) issued a statement outlining the basis for its advice.  “In the exercise of those powers, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions reviewed a file in relation to the MV Barima tragedy of the investigations done by the Guyana Police Force in relation thereto, and duly advised the institution of the charges of murder,” the statement said. According to the DPP’s Chambers, the advice was based on careful consideration of the evidence presented and the applicable legal principles.

Further, Parliamentary Leader of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), Dr. Terrence Campbell, labelled the charges against the trio “scapegoating” and said the charges amount to an unfair prosecution intended to divert attention away from the Government and the subject ministers.

Dr. Campbell outlined that murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. “The captain and crew charged had malice aforethought? Really? Even against themselves? They also had a reasonable chance of dying in this tragedy. We know that other crew members died. So, I guess there was malice aforethought against self!” he said.

APNU MP Ganesh Mahipaul also took to Facebook to express his frustration over the decision to charge the crew members. “If that captain had refused to take that boat to Port Kaituma, he would have either been dismissed or transferred. He could have lost his salary or been inconvenienced in other ways. Because that is how the F** PPP operates. Either you do as you’re told, or you suffer the consequences. All of you know that and yet talking S** as far as I am concerned…” he added.

Further, interim leader of the Alliance For Change (AFC), David Patterson, argued that if the goods superintendent has been charged with murder, it suggests that investigators know something that has not yet been made public. The former Minister of Public Infrastructure said, “For the Director of Public Prosecutions to recommend a murder charge, she must have received information that strongly suggests the goods superintendent deliberately overloaded the vessel and knew his actions could lead to the deaths of the passengers. What evidence do the police have that proves the vessel was overloaded, especially when Edghill publicly stated that it was not?”

Patterson further noted that there must be very strong evidence for the DPP to recommend a murder charge instead of lesser charges such as manslaughter or criminal negligence.

“The goods superintendent was not on the boat when it sank, so the police have somehow made the linkage that a) the vessel was overloaded before departure and b) that the captain and mate, agreed to proceed on a suicidal trip, since if the trio planned to murder the passengers, there was no guarantee that the captain and mate would survive. Finally, to prove murder, there must be motive, what was the trio’s motive?” he added.

Former Assistant Commissioner of Police Paul Slowe also questioned the decision in a social media post. “I thought that persons were identified to form a Commission of Inquiry to inquire into the MV Barima tragedy. But now I am reading that three men were this morning (July 28) charged with murder and remanded to prison, in relation to the same MV Barima tragedy. It begs the question: what is the position with the ministers with oversight responsibilities?” Slowe asked.

---

• COI, Delon Granderson, Kevin Price, MV Barima

---