MP Duncan charged with calling GECOM IT manager derogatory names

Sherod Duncan in the Diamond/Grove Magistrate’s Court compound.
Sherod Duncan in the Diamond/Grove Magistrate’s Court compound.

APNU+AFC Member of Parliament (MP) Sherod Duncan was charged yesterday over derogatory names he called the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) Information Technology Manager during his social media talk show last week. 

Duncan, 42, appear-ed at the Diamond/ Grove Magistrate’s Court, where he denied the charge and was granted his release on $200,000 bail. 

Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman read the charge, which alleges that on January 11, 2022, without legal or lawful justification or excuse, Duncan used a computer system to publish electronic data about Aneal Giddings with the intent to humiliate and embarrass and to cause emotional distress.

Duncan was represented by attorneys-at-law Khemraj Ramjattan, Nigel Hughes, Narissa Leander and Amanza Walton-Desir. The matter was adjourned until February 10. He was initially released on $275,000 bail. However, following an objection from his attorneys, the bail amount was reduced to $200,000.

Duncan was on Thursday released on $100,000 bail after being arrested based on a complaint made by Giddings. The police said that Giddings reported that about 8 pm on Tuesday last, Duncan, who is the host of the ‘In the Ring’ programme on Facebook, called him by name and referred to him as ‘jagabat’, ‘trench crappo’ and other disrespectful names during a broadcast. He has claimed the use of the derogatory names caused him significant emotional distress and humiliation. As a result, an investigation was launched.

Following yesterday’s court proceedings, Hughes told reporters that calling someone a ‘jagabat’ and ‘trench crappo’ is not an offence in itself. He added that the premise of the charge is that it was done using an electronic device. He said that the Cybercrime Act was not intended to have what was not a crime become a crime simply because an electronic device is used. Further, he said that it is not an indictable offence and therefore the bail amount of $275,000, which was the initial bail amount before it was reduced, was unusual.