Dear Editor,
My boyfriend, Nakema Deonauth was found lifeless in his apartment on 12th June. He was relatively young, healthy and lived alone. As part of the investigation into his death, an autopsy was conducted. The autopsy entailed an examination of Nakema’s body by the pathologist, Dr Singh and forensic toxicology testing of biological samples. While the pathologist did his examination since early June, the autopsy report cannot be completed without the toxicology results, and this has apparently led to the investigation reaching a standstill (to the best of my knowledge).
From what I’ve gathered it seems as if the investigators are awaiting the completed autopsy report to move forward with their investigation and here lies the problem. These samples were sent to the Guyana Forensic Science Laboratory (GFSL), the only one of its kind in Guyana, over 4 months ago and haven’t been tested as yet. While we anxiously waited for months for this part of the puzzle to be solved, and hopefully move us one step closer to closure, nothing was being done and I only learnt why last month. After becoming frustrated with the lack of progress I reached out to the Crime Chief, Mr. Blanhum and subsequently visited him at CID headquarters on 13th September.
There I met the lead investigator and was given the opportunity to ask questions and clarify whatever doubts I had. Mr. Blanhum also contacted the GFSL and asked about the toxicology report. From what was conveyed, I gathered that the GFSL is incapable of conducting the toxicology tests. I was then assured by Mr. Blanhum that the samples would be sent to Brazil. However, 6 weeks later and GFSL arrangements are yet to be finalised with a lab there, so the samples remain in storage. I believe that the GFSL was supposed to conduct ‘routine’ forensic toxicology testing on the samples taken from Nakema’s body, the sort of testing that should be conducted as part of an autopsy when the cause of death or circumstances surrounding the death has not been clearly established and an investigation follows. If the premier state forensic laboratory in the country cannot conduct basic toxicology testing, then why it is still opened and why are biological samples at ‘death scenes’ still being sent to it?
Editor, everyone I have either met or spoken to on the phone who are in some way involved in this matter such as the Crime Chief, investigators and personnel from pathology and the GFSL has been very approachable, professional and helpful in accommodating my many questions and visits/calls. I have truly been pleasantly surprised by their courteous manner and I have no complaints regarding my interactions with them, but I need closure and it has been months with no progress in this matter. I believe that the toxicology tests were not conducted at the GFSL because of the lack of required equipment, materials and technology; and not due to the competency of its staff. I may be wrong in my assumption however, I’m not privy to the inner workings of the GFSL. Regardless of the cause, the fact remains that the GFSL receives samples/evidence from death scenes yet is unable to conduct routine forensic toxicology testing.
Sincerely,
Narissa Deokarran
