Accused told cops he was only lookout during Lusignan massacre

-police witness testifies

Lusignan massacre accused Mark Royden Williams had told police that he accompanied the members of the gang who  went to Track ‘A’ Lusignan and committed the 11 murders but said that he did not kill anyone as he was only armed with a cutlass.

Williams’ confession was read to Justice Navindra Singh and a mixed jury yesterday in the High Court, after his statement to the police was admitted as evidence in his trial.

The statement was taken by policeman Suraj Singh, who is attached to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and who read it to the jury. An oral statement that was given by Williams’ co-accused James Anthony Hyles, called ‘Sally,’ in which he denied knowledge of the crime, was also related by Singh.

Mark Royden Williams
Mark Royden Williams

Singh was the only witness to give evidence yesterday and he was then cross-examined by defence attorneys Nigel Hughes and Roger Yearwood.

Singh said Williams, called ‘Smallie,’ told police after he was arrested that he had been on the Lusignan “wuk” (the attack). He said the afternoon before the attack, Rondel ‘Fineman’ Rawlins told him that he, Robin Chung called ‘Chung Boy,’ ‘Uncle Willie,’ Otis Fifee called ‘Mud-Up,’ Michael Fah/Caesar called ‘Capone,’ ‘John Eye,’ Dwane Williams called ‘Small Fren’ and ‘Sally’ that they were going on  the “wuk.”

That night, Williams told police, ‘Fineman’ gave ‘Uncle Willie,’ ‘Mud-Up,’ ‘Capone,’ ‘Chung Boy,’ ‘John Eye’ and ‘Small Fren’ guns. He said, “me get one chappa. ‘Fineman’ tell me that we going and #%& up some people in Lusignan and who nah want to go deh against he and he gone kill who stay back.” He added, “me had to go with them because me nah want ‘Fineman’ do me nothing.”
To reach Lusignan, Williams’ statement quoted him as saying that they walked through the cane fields. They arrived after midnight.  Once there, he said, “Fineman tell me fuh stay back at the dam and watch out. All the rest of dem run in the street and me start fuh hear gunshots.”

The gunmen spent about half an hour in the area, Williams told police, adding that during this time all he heard was gunshots. After they were finished, he said that they all walked through the cane fields back to Buxton. They then went into hiding at different places but Williams said that his hiding place was in the backdam.

Williams also told police that “Fineman nah give me gun fuh dis wuk because he and me nah been a pull.” He said that early in the morning they became aware that 11 persons were killed “by dem boys.”

According to him, he knew who the killers were because “me been a look out for dem when them been a shoot up the place.” He also stated that he did not know why ‘Fineman’ wanted to kill the people who died in the massacre.  He added that he did not shoot anyone.

Williams and Hyles are on trial for the January 26, 2008 murders of Clarence Thomas, 48, his daughter Vanessa Thomas, 12 and his son Ron Thomas; Mohandai Gourdat, 32, and her two sons, four-year-old Seegobind Harrilall and ten-year-old Seegopaul Harrilall; Shazam Mohamed, 22; Shaleem Baksh, 55; Seecharran Rooplall, 56, his wife Dhanrajie Ramsingh, 52, and their 11-year-old daughter Raywattie Ramsingh.

‘Didn’t lime with Fineman’

 James Anthony Hyles
James Anthony Hyles

Meanwhile, during cross-examination Williams’s attorney, Yearwood, asked Singh about the steps he had taken before he took the statement from his client.
Some of the questions Yearwood asked Singh included whether he had fed Williams before he took the statement, to which he said yes, and if he would agree with the suggestion that he was seasoned in taking caution statements. Singh stated that he did not fully agree with the suggestion.

Yearwood also asked Singh if he had ever visited the scene at Lusignan and if he collected any spent shells from it. Singh responded no to both questions.

During his evidence, Singh had also told the court that when he put the allegation about the Lusignan massacre to Hyles and cautioned him, the accused told him that he was a bus conductor and did not “lime” with ‘Fineman’ and others.

According to Singh, Hyles also told him that the only thing he knew about the massacre is what he had seen on television. Singh also said that he asked Hyles if he wanted to put what he told him into writing and he replied no.

Hughes, who is representing Hyles, also cross-examined Singh’s evidence about the oral statement Hyles had given him. Hughes inquired from him if part of his professional responsibility does not entail checking out an alibi given by a suspect. Singh stated it is necessary for him to do so but when Hughes went on to ask him if the reason for this is to verify what the suspect is saying, he replied that it is to measure what they tell him.

Singh also said under cross-examination that he was second-in-charge of the team of investigators conducting the investigation into the killings. Hughes then asked him if he has any recollection of checking out Hyles’ alibi and Singh stated he did not have any. Singh was then asked if he recalled any police taking on the task of verifying Hyles’ alibi. He said he could no
t recall that.

The lawyer also asked the witness if a confrontation was held between Hyles and Durwin Wright, a witness who had testified that Hyles went to his home and told him that he participated in the killings. Singh said he did recall and explained that the confrontation was held in the presence of him and another policeman.

Hughes suggested to Singh that the reason for the confrontation was for Wright to confront Hyles with what he said he told him and he agreed with the lawyer on this.

Singh was also shown a copy of the statement Wright had given about the confrontation and in which he had also said that Hyles denied the allegations. Hughes then asked Singh if it is correct to say that twice the allegation about the killings was put to his client and he denied them on both occasions. Singh said yes in reply.

Wright had also testified that when Hyles came to his home around 6:30am, he told him to put on his television and when he did so he saw the Lusignan massacre story. Because of this, Hughes asked Singh if he made any checks to see whether there was indeed television coverage of the incident like Wright had said and he replied that he did not do so and neither did he know if anyone did.

Singh also accepted the suggestion by Hughes that when Hyles was charged it was based on what Wright had said but he did not verify anything Hyles had told him.

According to Singh, he interviewed former co-accused in the killings Dwane Williams two Fridays ago without knowing that the trial was scheduled to begin the following Monday, when he was asked about his knowledge of when the trial was set to begin.

The trial continues today.