Final date given in teen torture case

A final date has been given for the complainants and witnesses in the trial of three policemen accused of severely wounding a 15-year-old boy during a murder investigation to present themselves to the court or the matter would be dismissed.

Since the trio was charged in November last year, the trial has not started due to the witnesses not

The tortured teen being led into the West Demera Hospital after his condition became known to the public (SN file photo)
The tortured teen being led into the West Demerara Hospital after his condition became known to the public (SN file photo)

attending court. Relatives of one of the complainants have since told this newspaper that they have accepted compensation to drop the matter while the teenager at the centre of the case has vanished along with his family.

The case was called again today at the Vreed-en-Hoop Magistrate’s Court and put off when the police prosecutor indicated that there were no witnesses. Magistrate Nyasha Williams-Hatmin, who had issued arrest warrants for the three complainants after they did not attend court, then upon the request of the defendants’ attorney, Satyesh Kissoon set a peremptory date for January next year.

At the previous court date, the magistrate had told the prosecutor to send for the other witnesses, saying that they would start with them, but none were available today.

In October, Williams-Hatmin issued warrants for Deonarine Rafick, Nouravie Wilfred and the 15-year-old boy. The trio was held during the investigation into the murder of retired Region Three vice-chairman Ramenaught Bisram in October last year. During the investigation, the teenage boy’s genital area was set alight allegedly by the policemen involved in the case and it was only when this was revealed in the media that he was taken to the hospital

The case drew national and international condemnation with the matter being cited before the United Nations Human Rights Council. An investigation was done by the police force’s Office of Professional Responsibility and the Ministry of Home Affairs had acknowledged that the boy was tortured.

Relatives of Rafick have since confirmed to this newspaper that they accepted compensation to “settle” the matter while a relative of Wilfred said that he had been told by Wilfred’s mother, that their matter was “settled”. The relative had said that Wilfred was in Trinidad. However, the 15-year-old boy and his family have vanished while Rafick continues to work on his farm.

The Director of Public Prosecutions had recommended that the policemen be charged. Rafick and Wilfred were also beaten during the investigation and a wounded and battered Rafick was charged with the murder and remanded to prison but later released on the orders of the DPP after it was determined that a confession statement reportedly given by him, which was the foundation of the case against him, had not been given freely and voluntarily. Wilfred was released after having been in police custody for a week.

Three policemen were charged with maliciously wounding the three suspects. Sergeant Narine Lall, Constable Mohanram Dolai and Corporal Oswald Foo were charged last November. According to the charges brought against the trio, on October 28, at the Leonora Police Station, they unlawfully and maliciously wounded Rafick, with intent to maim, disfigure, disable or cause him grievous bodily harm.

A second charge against Lall and Dolai alleges that between October 20 and October 29, at the Leonora Police Station, they unlawfully and maliciously wounded Wilfred.

The duo was also slapped with a charge of felonious wounding,  which alleges that they unlawfully and maliciously wounded the 15-year-old boy, with intent to maim, disfigure, disable or cause him grievous bodily harm. This incident allegedly occurred on October 28 at the Leonora Police Station. The men remain on the job.

The other witnesses are Shirley Thomas, Lyson Thompson, Kishore Deonarine and Abdul Rafick. The magistrate ordered that they be summoned.

Kissoon noted that the witnesses have not attended any of the court dates and referred to the publicity attached to the matter. He asked for a preemptory date to set and should none of the witnesses or complainants turn up, the matter be dismissed.