Latest update April 19th, 2024 12:59 AM
Apr 01, 2014 News
Almost two weeks after he bolted from a city courtroom, accused biker killer Rondy Jagdeo’s freedom may be short lived. The Director of Public Prosecutions has initiated steps that could lead to the reopening of his case.
Kaieteur News was informed that DPP Shalimar Ali-Hack, who recently returned from vacation leave, yesterday signed a letter in which she requested that Acting Chief Magistrate Priya Sewnarine-Beharry produce all the depositions that were taken during the preliminary inquiry into the murder of biker, Kirk Davis.
“I will look at them and once all of the witnesses who gave statements to the police did not testify, I can advise that the Magistrate reopen the case, just like was done in the Carlyle Barton matter,” the DPP told this newspaper yesterday.
The case fell apart after key prosecution witnesses failed to turn up to give their evidence.
On March 20, Chief Magistrate Sewnarine-Beharry discharged the murder charge instituted against Jagdeo, five months after he was accused of gunning down Davis, who was said to be his good friend.
Jagdeo, a 28-year-old Water Street businessman, had been on the run for several weeks after the shooting but eventually surrendered to police after a wanted bulletin was issued for his arrest.
He first appeared before the Chief Magistrate on October 30, last.
The pre-trial matter engaged the attention of the court for a little over one month. Some seven witnesses were called to take the stand on behalf of the Prosecution.
The Prosecution was ordered to close its case after failing on three occasions to produce its two remaining civilian witnesses to the court.
The paramour of the deceased, Naliffa Dookie, and the only eyewitness, Rondell Marks, also known as “Barber” were absent, despite being summoned by the court and radio messages being sent demanding their attendance.
After the Prosecution closed its case, Yearwood stood on behalf of the accused and made his no-case submission.
Magistrate Sewnarine-Beharry, upheld the no-case submission and ruled that the Prosecution had indeed failed to present the court with sufficient evidence for a prima facie case of murder to be established against Jagdeo and as such discharged the matter.
Upon being told that he was “free to go,” Jagdeo walked briskly out of the courtroom. He strolled to the Police Outpost, ditched his shirt and donned a purple hooded jersey and sun shades.
Jagdeo then slipped a bag around his shoulder and made his way to a waiting white CBR motorcycle, on which he rode away from the courthouse.
Relatives of the deceased had expressed displeasure with the judicial system, stating that the proceedings were a slap in their face.
“I understand the court’s position, since there were constant no shows by witnesses, but at some point in time the police were in contact with these witnesses. What happened to a witness protection system? Why weren’t provisions made for them?”
“Here it is that a man walks free because these witnesses, in fear, may have left the country. Now a mother is without a son and a son without a father because of a sloppy system.”
She expressed hope that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) would reopen the case and that better efforts would be made in terms of investigations.
“The system has enough resources to achieve things, but it’s slackness and laziness all around. No effort was placed into this case.”
Two weeks ago, Crime Chief Seelall Persaud, who is now the Acting Commissioner of Police, had told members of the media that the power resides in the Director of Public Prosecutions to order that the Rondy Jagdeo murder trial be reopened.
Persaud explained to Kaieteur News that in this instance, the “key” witness, a civilian, failed to turn up in court on several occasions. He said that civilian witnesses have a “moral obligation” to come to court and give evidence.
He added that there’s little that the Police Force could do, unless the court, through the Magistrate, issues an arrest warrant for that witness. “That witness would be arrested and held until the matter is completed.”
When questioned further about the possibility of the case reopening, Persaud said that it is the Director of Public Prosecutions who decides on reopening the matter.
“The DPP can cause action to be taken; the DPP can instruct the Magistrate to reopen the inquiry,” Persaud said.
And that is exactly what the DPP is contemplating at the moment. However, it is widely believed that Jagdeo has already left the jurisdiction, since he had done so immediately after the murder.
It would not be the first time that a murder matter has been reopened long after it was discharged in the Magistrate’s Court.
A similar course of action was taken against beauty queen Carolann Lynch who is presently facing the court for a second time in connection with the murder of her husband Farouk Razack.
The same was done in the case of cricketer Carlyle Barton who was charged with the murder of Shawn Nelson.
Despite the shooting being captured on camera, Barton walked away a free man after key prosecution witnesses were a no show.
Although the DPP in accordance with Section 72 (2) (ii) (a) of the Criminal Law (Procedure) Act, 10:01 had directed that the case be reopened, Barton remains at large having disappeared immediately after he was granted his freedom.
Please share this to every Guyanese including your house cats.
Apr 19, 2024
SportsMax – West Indies Women’s captain Hayley Matthews delivered a stellar all-round performance to lead her team to a commanding 113-run victory over Pakistan Women in the first One Day...Kaieteur News – For years, the disciples of Bharrat Jagdeo have woven a narrative of economic success during his tenure... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]