Walter Rodney Commission of Inquiry…Witness asks for a handwriting expert to authenticate documents

Jun 06, 2014 News

---

By Latoya Giles
The authenticities of several photocopied documents are now being questioned as former Army Chief and retired Director General of the National Service, Norman McLean,is denying that he knows them. McLean was called to the witness stand as the Walter Rodney Commission of inquiry continued yesterday.
The witness also accused commission lawyer Glen Hanoman of trying to take him on a fishing trip after he continued to ask questions outside of the realm that they are investigating.
Several documents with the signature of former army Major Godwin McPherson purporting to show the handover of weapons to the House of Israel could not be verified by McLean.
Major General McLean who said that he was familiar with the signature of the late army officer denied that the signature attached to a document shown to him was not McPherson’s own. The document, an “accounts form”, was dated June 24, 1979.
McLean denied the suggestion and immediately asked that the commission summon a handwriting expert to determine the authenticity of the document.
McLean was shown a payroll document with the name “Smith” attached to it.  That “payroll” document was dated May 24, 1979.
According to McLean, the document speaks directly to something that looks as though it was “cut and paste”.  McLean again said that the pay roll document didn’t state who collected salary or the signatures.
Lawyer for the commission, Glenn Hanoman, was trying to show that Gregory Smith, known in the army as “William Gregory Smith” was still collecting a salary from the army although he had left. McLean had earlier stated that Smith was considered a deserter of the army.
Hanoman claimed that the documents were acquired from the GDF and that it is his intention to call the Officer who supplied the documents at a later date to testify.
117 questions to answer…
The witness was asked whether he had sought legal advice prior to him coming to the commission. McLean responded, “Not really”. The former Army Chief was asked whether he was aware of the Terms of Reference, and why his statement to the commission was only two pages long.
He responded that given the fact that he was given short notice to answer 117 questions that was the best he could have come up with.
McLean said that he was concerned at the fact that he was subpoenaed and was never asked if he wanted to participate.
Hanoman questioned McLean about the year he took over the army. McLean was appointed head of the army in July 1979, something which was a surprise to him.
McLean was asked whether it was former President Forbes Burnham who was instrumental in getting him the job. Further, whether he had spoken to Burnham after his appointment, since the president was Arthur Chung.
McLean was questioned whether Burnham would call him regularly when he was head of the National Service and he responded in the affirmative. Hanoman then proceeded to ask whether “Burnham was happy” which prompted McLean to respond by saying “I could call him”. Laugher erupted.
The witness was then asked about the purpose of the Guyana National Service, which according to Major General McLean, was for young people between the ages of 16 and 25 to help the “New Guyana Man”,  develop skills for young people and to impart discipline.”
Hanoman then shifted his interest to records that the army might have kept.  The witness was asked whether “Gregory Smith” was a rank following the death of Rodney and whether the army had made checks to determine so.
“When the checks were made for “Gregory Smith” nothing was found,” said McLean. He added that subsequently the army received another call giving them the number 41/41. McLean said that another check was made and that is when they realized that there was a rank by the name of “William Gregory Smith”.
This piece of evidence was substantiated in a book written by Smith entitled “Assignation— Cry of a Failed Revolution” in which he claimed that the army never knew him as “Gregory Smith”.
McLean said that he never went through the data base of the army, but he did instruct his officers to look into it. He explained that there was a chain of command in the army which had to be followed.
He was asked what the army did after the death of Rodney.
McLean did not provide much detail but reiterated that the police and his staff, including Joseph Harmon, David Granger, Cecil “Skip” Roberts, and others would have been involved and would be able to provide details.
McLean made it clear, however, that he did not know of the Army’s involvement in Rodney’s death, or its abuse by the government during his 11-year stewardship.
“There could have been rogue elements and things could have happened without me knowing.”
The former Chief of Staff denied too that he would go to PNC Congress and swear allegiance, something a previous witness alleged.
“Not this boy, not this boy here,” he said when asked. He added that when he was sworn in it was before the then President Arthur Chung and the pledge was for the protection of the country.
McLean was further asked if he felt that Rodney had infiltrated the GDF. According to McLean he did not believe that he did, but he knew that the army had supporters of the Working People’s Alliance.  He was then asked whether he thought that Rodney was a security threat.
McLean said that he didn’t see him as a threat. In fact he considered Rodney as a “front line leader”.
Attorney at law Andrew Pilgrim, who is looking into the interest of the Rodney family, in his brief cross examination accused Mclean of ‘turning a blind eye’ or ‘washing his hands’ on the investigation. McLean denied this suggestion.
McLean will return to the commission once several documents from the army have been handed over.

---

---