The Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) has criticised the Guyana Police Force (GPF) for arresting and detaining for six of the nine women who claim to be able to provide an alibi for Glaston Henry, one of the persons charged with the murder of West Berbice teen Haresh Singh.
“The arrest and detention of… the women… is shocking…Everything surrounding this event smacks of malicious abuse of police powers,” the GHRA said in a statement on Saturday.
According to the GHRA, each aspect of the procedure adopted by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) towards the witnesses raises questions.
“Why threaten the women with arrest prior to interviewing them? Why excessive bail of $100,000? Why detain all the women? The inference to be drawn is that such behaviour is intended to intimidate the women into abandoning their statements,” it concluded.
The GHRA reminded that local and international law is clear that the police may arrest only if a person is reasonably suspected of committing an offence and that people cannot be detained “to assist with an enquiry.”
Further, it noted that un-convicted persons must be treated as innocent, which rules out detaining them, which it argued should always be a last resort.
The women were arrested after they voluntarily presented themselves accompanied by their lawyer Nigel Hughes, at the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).
They were immediately faced with the allegation of perverting the course of justice and after hours of questioning were asked to post G$100,000 each for their release after 6pm on Friday. When they were unable to pay the sum, they were transferred to the East La Penitence lock-up.
According to Hughes, the women were eventually released on bail at 11.30 pm on Friday after funds were sourced via donations from relatives and supporters.
Recording
In in his own statement last evening, Hughes again accused the GPF of failing to investigate the contents of the alibi statements provided to them before the institution of the charge of murder against Glaston Henry.
Notably while this statement repeats most of the claims made on Thursday, it deviates on the matter of who recorded the video which the family was watching on the morning of September 9, at the time when it was said the murder was committed. It is the contention of the witnesses that the accused was present with his family at that time.
On Thursday, Hughes claimed that Glaston Henry Snr had recorded the video, which was viewed live but yesterday he claimed that the video was recorded and transmitted by attorney Patrice Henry on the instructions of the senior Henry.
“The live recording of the post mortem by Patrice Henry was watched by the persons who were at the home of Glaston and Patricia Henry on the 9th day of September 2020,” Hughes’ statement said.
Glaston Henry Jnr, also known as Gladwin Henry, was charged on Tuesday alongside 29-year-old Philip Anderson, called ‘Ratman,’ 27-year-old Joel Gittins, called ‘Bolo,’ and 21-year-old Charles Scott, called ‘Bucko,’ with the murder of Singh. Singh was attacked and murdered days after cousins Joel and Isaiah Henry were found dead.
Seeking to get the charge withdrawn, Hughes last Thursday told a news conference that he had provided both the police and the Director of Public Prosecutions with evidence that Henry was at his mother’s home several villages away when Singh was murdered on September 9th last year. He said that the morning of Singh’s murder was also the day on which the post-mortem examinations for Isaiah and Joel Henry were conducted. The Henry family, he maintained, had gathered to view the procedures, which were broadcast live by Glaston Henry Snr from Georgetown.
In response, the GPF declared that it had investigated the alibi and found it could not be verified.
Saying there was evidence to dispute Hughes’ claims that Glaston Henry Snr had recorded the post-mortem examinations—and by extension calling into question the claims of the purported alibi witnesses—the police on Thursday announced that all nine were being sought in connection with alleged attempts to pervert the course of justice.
Not disposed to or incapable
According to Hughes by classifying the witnesses as criminals before they had even spoken with any of them or investigated their alibi statements, the GPF showed that it was not interested in conducting a fair investigation into the murder of Haresh Singh.
“It is now evidence that the GPF is either not disposed to or capable of conducting a fair or reliable investigation based on forensic evidence, into either the murder of Haresh Singh or the murders of Isaiah and Joel Henry,” he declared.
The attorney further contended that the dedication of more than 15 CID police officers to video record, interview and follow the every action and interaction of the witnesses whilst in custody for in excess of six and half hours on indicates that arresting and intimidating six women who have all confirmed their alibi statements was a priority.
According to Hughes, this “is the hallmark of an inadequate, unsatisfactory investigation lacking in diligence or the basic minimum standards of contemporary investigative operations.”
