Colwyn Harding, other remanded on robbery with violence charge

Colwyn Harding and an accomplice were yesterday remanded to prison when they appeared before a city magistrate on a robbery charge.

The courtroom of Chief Magistrate Ann McLennan heard that on November 14, at Barr Street, Kitty, Georgetown, Harding, 26, of 1A Laing Avenue and Tyron Escourse, 23, of 646 West Ruimveldt, robbed Jameel Williams, of a Samsung cell phone valued $5,000, a pocket knife worth $1,500 and $15,000, and at the time, before or after the robbery made use of personal violence. The duo, who stood in the prisoner’s docks unrepresented by an attorney pleaded not guilty to the offence.

Colwyn Harding’
Colwyn Harding’

Police Prosecutor Neville Jeffers told the court that he was objecting to bail because of the prevalence of the offence and the nature of the allegation. He also added that because the men used violence to carry out the act they should not be granted bail. The prosecutor who did not share the facts of the matter with the court, said that the men admitted their involvement in a caution statement. Jeffers further stated that while Escource had no known prior matters or pending charges, his accomplice Harding has a matter that he has not been attending, in another court.

However, both Harding and Escource denied any involvement in the robbery. They also denied that they knew each other. Harding also told the court that he has been attending his case in the other court.

The Chief Magistrate subsequently remanded both men to prison. Their matter was adjourned until November 24 when it will be called in Court 10 and 11 for statements.

Three years ago, Harding had accused two officers of raping him with a baton while he was arrested and in police custody. The matter was dismissed by Magistrate Leron Daly this year, owing to insufficient evidence.

In 2014, Harding was charged with robbery with use of personal violence committed against Sherry-Ann Hope. This matter was later dismissed by Magistrate Judy Latchman owing to the consistent absence of the virtual complainant during the trial.