Henry Greene has been at the centre of calls for him to be charged with rape. The proponents of the charge insisted that he abused his office because he preyed on a woman who had gone to him for help. They had earlier said that they were convinced that he had raped the woman, in keeping with her statements to the press and later, to the police.
The Director of Public Prosecutions actually recommended charges but these were challenged. In the end the Chief Justice ruled that the charges were irrational. The DPP had said that she took into consideration the various statements, including the statement signed jointly by the Jamaican Constabulary and Crime Chief Seelal Persaud.
If indeed that was the case then the DPP failed to heed a comment in the very report that suggested that the action of the complainant was questionable.
However, sometimes noise drowns out many things that should be in the public glare. The noise drowned out that the woman did approach the Police Commissioner to get him to pervert the course of justice. That in itself is a criminal offence. The Commissioner should have arrested the woman instead of seizing the opportunity to indulge in sex.
What is of interest is that none of the people who clamour for the rape charge has even attempted to focus on the fact that the woman undertook a criminal act. Yet, given the nature of the society, the protesting public would have been incensed had lawyers for the commissioner placed the woman’s integrity on trial.
There is another thing that the public seems to have caused the DPP to ignore, at least for the time being. Everything emanated from an investigation into an allegation of extortion. The woman at the centre of the Henry Greene affair had reportedly attempted to blackmail a woman whom she recorded having sex with her husband.
It is this that caused the police to take possession of the cellular phone that the woman allegedly used to record the subject of the extortion. It is this phone that caused the woman to approach the Commissioner with a view to having him recover the instrument.
We must now wonder whether all that has transpired were not intended to detract from the original incident that sparked everything that was to follow, including the retirement of the commissioner. That particular criminal matter still stands but there seems to be no move at prosecution. It is as if the law has taken second place to emotion.
If that is the case the woman can now move to the courts to sue for deprivation of property contrary to the constitution. She can argue that the state discriminated against her. We are certain that any other in that situation would have been charged.
There was a similar happening when a Minister of Local Government struck down a policeman on the road and drove away. He was never charged and the policeman remains crippled. This same Minister discharged his firearm and again escaped prosecution. But we know of many others who were prosecuted even as they discharged their licenced firearm to either defend themselves or to protect their property.
It is customary for the law to favour the wealthy against the poor but in many other countries where all are equal before the law none can claim special privileges. Guyana is certainly not one that can deny that it grants special privileges to certain people. The woman at the centre of the Henry Greene issue certainly enjoyed special privileges.
The Police Commissioner has retired. He is now a private citizen to be treated as such under the law although we fail to see any change in the legal position regardless of appeals. What we expect would be a ruling on the failure of the police or the DPP to charge for extortion.
There is evidence that there was an attempt to blackmail. The woman in the Greene affair has said as much in statements to the police and later to the foreign investigators.
Sep 23, 2017The annual GTT National Indoor Hockey Championships returns to the Cliff Anderson Sports Hall for the first time in seven years as the Guyana Hockey Board (GHB) stages its first tournament on the...
Supporters of Forbes Burnham believed in him. They saw him as a political saviour. Most believed his every word and would... more
Editor’s Note, If your sent letter was not published and you felt its contents were valid and devoid of libel or personal attacks, 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]