Ex-army officer Oliver Hinckson was yesterday finally given his pre-trial liberty and walked out of the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court after he was granted bail on the charge of advocating a terrorist act.
Lead defence attorney, Nigel Hughes shortly after 12.30 pm yesterday told Acting Chief Magistrate Melissa Robertson that he wished to inform her of certain “developments” in the High Court matter concerning his client’s bail.
Oliver Hinckson
“…at 9.45 this morning the Honourable Justice (William) Ramlal…made the order absolute,” Hughes said, referring to the order for a rule of nisi of certiorari which had been issued to Magistrate Robertson in July.
“…that is out of the way,” he continued. “Now there is no High Court matter…there is nothing, absolutely nothing stopping you from granting bail,” Hughes told the court after he renewed his bail application.
Roger Yearwood, another of Hinckson’s attorneys who was present before Justice Ramlal in the High Court yesterday morning, said: “The judge has ruled. There is no impediment to you deliberating on our application for bail.”
State Prosecutor Sanjeev Datadin after listening to the defence submission questioned whether the court would take advice from his colleagues. “I am stunned,” he stated before objecting to Hughes’ application for bail.
In his objection Datadin reiterated his previous grounds and told the court that during his court matters in the 1990s Hinckson had assaulted a witness in one of his cases and was also charged with escape from lawful custody.
After listening to both parties the magistrate announced that Hinckson was granted bail in the sum of $1 million. A previous decision for the granting of bail had been thwarted by an approach to the high court.
After the formalities of Hinckson’s bail were sorted out by his attorneys he took a walk around the courtyard then promptly left the compound and entered a waiting car.
Continuation of PI
Last Thursday the Preli-minary Inquiry (PI) into the advocating a terrorist act charge against Hinckson was adjourned to Tuesday so that the defence lawyers could respond to Datadin’s written submission.
The submission was laid over to the defence in response to their objection to diary testimony. However, Hughes was absent from the proceedings on Tuesday and the matter was adjourned to yesterday for him to reply to Datadin’s submissions.
Hughes explained to the court that his response to the prosecution’s submissions would rely on his previous objection in which he had stated that Detective Corporal Suraj Singh could not be asked to refer to the diary or its contents since neither had been tendered as evidence. This would be impermissible, he had stated.
In Datadin’s response to the objection, Hughes said, he referred to two points: the principle of Res Gestae (Latin for facts relevant to the case and admissible in evidence) and the question of admitting the notes in Singh’s diary to evidence.
Res Gestae, he contended, does not relate or apply to the prosecution’s circumstance because it applies to the incident in question and only applies to the criminal cause of action that gave rise to the charge.
The attorney went on to explain that if there was a case of murder and the victim managed to make an oral statement before dying, the statement given was close to the incident and there was no opportunity for fabrication.
Therefore, he pointed out, the questioning of his client by the interrogating officer, Trevor Reid, and the recording of those answers can not be legally classified as Res Gestae.
Responding to Datadin’s second point Hughes commenced by quoting the first and second paragraphs under the heading “Confession” in the prosecution’s submission which stated:
“The prosecution respectfully submits that the Judges’ Rules are not law and are only guidelines as to what ought to be done in criminal prosecution; see Phipson on Evidence 11th Edition paragraph 805. Further, the breach of the Judges’ Rules does not render the evidence obtained inadmissible.”
The purpose of the Judges’ Rule, the attorney said, is to protect the suspect/accused from hearsay evidence hostile to him which is alleged to have emanated from him. Such alleged statements/ admissions, Hughes said, cannot be tendered into evidence without first ascertaining that they were obtained voluntarily from the accused.
“The admission into evidence of any admission or statement alleged to have been made by the accused to the police under interrogation,” Hughes stated, “can only be done after the court has been satisfied that the admission has been made freely and voluntarily.”
It is a legal obligation of the court, Hughes stressed, to be satisfied that statements/ admissions, if made by the accused, were made freely and voluntarily.
He further highlighted that the accused is not obligated to say anything and must be made aware of the right to remain silent and that if that right is violated then the police can record and use anything said against them.
Hughes said that it is clear that the Judges’ Rules have been breached. According to him, 3b of the rule states that any questions asked and answers given must be recorded in full and signed by the accused and if he refused then it must be signed by the interrogating officer. Further, he explained, another section of the rule states that during the recording of an interrogation if two or more police officers are present when the statements are taken then the evidence, that is the statements, should be signed and co-signed.
“Oliver Hinckson at the time refused to sign that record,” Hughes said referring to the diary extract. “There-fore, how can they ask the court to admit the extract to evidence?”
The diary extract, the attorney further stated, was not signed by neither Reid nor Singh.
In his brief oral response to the defence’s submission Prosecutor Datadin stated that Hinckson had said: “It’s okay but I am not signing.”
Datadin said that in the PI facts are being taken to determine whether there is enough evidence for the accused to stand trial in the High Court. “How can this court then be aware of the facts if the defence is objecting to evidence (the diary extract) being presented?” he questioned.
The matter has been adjourned to next Thursday for Magistrate Robertson to make her ruling.
As a former trained SandHurst Officer Cadet and a human being, I am extremely happy for my fellow human whose rights were tarnished and eliminated due to a country which can be said will soon be “below par: because of its ill leadreship. We must all recognised wrong when it hits us in the face and must stand up for whats right, not whats being paid. The courts must work on their own belief and must not be led astray by political interferance. Mr. Hinckson has served his country well especially when he was at Monns (which has now been coupled with SandHurst) and thus should have never been in the position which he once was…its a disgrace on behalf of who ever sent the police to do a job they couldn’t complete.
IT APPEARS THAT GUYANA’S CONSTITUTION (UPHOLDING FREE SPEECH……) IS ALIVE AFTER ALL. :-X
Trained at Sandhurst so what?Many others are too.Get a life.
Sandhurst First —-he was charged for a terrorists act —he should not be given bail . In other countries like the USA –they are deny bail (eg the iraqisthat are held in Quantanamo ) . This is a serious offence –he should stay in Jail irrespective of who they are . What good did Hinckson do for Guyana in serving his country —he had troubles after a few years as he got back from sandsurst . Let me remind you that he also had problems with the previous administaration .
This man must be watched closely. I have had the opportunity to talk to him on several instances, and I can say that all is not well with the way he thinks, have always given the authorities trouble – since the flour smuggling days.
Congrats to the defence team.However this is just the beginning in him being granted total freedom.Long way to go lots of work to do.
Freedom?He had it, and did not know what it was.That is why he is where he is today.
The judge did the right thing to give mr. hinckson his pre-trial bail, now i know that justice is being served, i would urge mr.hinckson to be careful and watch his back and enjoy your freedom and prepare yourself for your trial, cause the powers to be is still watching you.
In the future we need to do a comparative analysis of “business” individuals and see who is caught doing what and how much they are put on bail. We will then know that corruption and collusion is what makes Guyana successful down the path of self destruction.
“Kaieteur Gold” To “SandHurst First”….. Did you mean a kind of “SOPHIA DECLARATION EXPOSE’ to determine how certain wealth was acquired be certain individuals….. and have an Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI)-like probe by the “Guyana Police” of the business operations like is being done on Wall Street here in the USA. 8-)
I am of the strong belief that prayers can move mountains and i have seen many women of different backgrounds attending Mr. Hinckson’s court proceedings. At this time he was infront of the now “off the bench” magistrate Gordon G. Magistrate Gilhuys would normally make remarks and jokes while denying Mr. Hinckson bail constantly now look at the position he has found himself.
Well said sandhurst first. God indeed works in mysterious ways.
“ROOTS AND GROW” :-)
PRESIDENTIAL SALUTE FOR DE MAN – DRUM ROLL!!!!
ONCE A SOLDIER ALWAYS A SOLDIER. 8-)
At last Justice seem to be served in Guyana.
As a Guyanese we have to preserve Freedaom of expression.
Third World countries should take example from the USA.
If people had spoken about some of those 2 cent leaders in the Caribbean like they did Bush, they would have either been in jail or dead.
I am following this case to see if I have to sell my properties and wipe the dust off my feet from Guyana.
He made a statement urging a meeting with the leaders in Buxton and said he was prepared to meet with them. The powers that be call them Criminals, they call themselves Freedom fighters. Remember the Enmore martyrs were also called criminals and now History sees them as Martyrs. Even Barack Obama said he is prepared to meet with the Leaders that Bush term axis of Evil.That is Diplomacy and Wisdom.
Re: “[...Even Barack Obama said he is prepared to meet with the Leaders that Bush term axis of Evil.That is Diplomacy and Wisdom....]” Putting this another way would/might be – “Guilt By Association”. ;-)
this is the norm in the courts in guyana . thanks for attorneys like nigel hughes who did a good job
When the five powers are not Manipulated/Contaminated by one person(thepresident)there will be pre-trial bail, the contrary maintained in jail, like ‘66-’92 period.
I’m pleased that you’re out Mr Hinckson! But please beware they may come again with some other accusation or another. Stay under the radar & GOOD LUCK.
i could not say it better than that myself
Can someone help me to wrap this around my mind!?!?! A guy goes to the City Hall at a gathering & as a soldier (Sand Hurst trained) offers to give the govt a hand with the prevailing crime situation & is charged for sedition. Nevertheless other guys of known questionable character & drug ties actually execute people in the name of crime fighting assistance, publicise it, is found with huge arms & amunitions caches on more than one occasion, have henchmen who are STILL being found & associated with huge arms finds & these guys either get a slap on the wrist or NOTHING AT ALL (when they are MISTAKENLY caught)!?!?!?
you dont need help you are right on target, The Guyana government must have been reading George Orwell’s Animal Farm ……..apparently they didn’ get to the end.
Fulano, welcome to Guyana! I am happy to hear that Oliver is out on bail, however he has to be very very careful. He needs to keep a low profile, but what the heck? They will think of something to lock him up again. Mr. Hinckson, keep praying. I will do the same for you.
You just laid out the entire justice system/process in Guyana. So, you already know it, it’s understanding it is the problem for all of us.
You have done very well in wrapping it around not only your mind but the minds of many Fulano. But I have shared those same concerns. I guess the law is for certain people.