Testimony by cops on ‘assassination plot’ triggers questions
Two police officers testified on day two of the Commission of Inquiry (COI) into the alleged plot to assassinate President David Granger.
Their testimonies raised questions from the Chairman Paul Slowe as to the competence of the officers conducting investigations into such a grave allegation.
Sergeant Kamal Pitamber was the first to be called to the stand yesterday, where he testified to being the most senior officer on the ground when the investigations began on March 29, when he was instructed by Assistant Superintendent of Police, Caesar, to collect a statement from Andrif Gillard, who has alleged that businessman Nizam Khan offered him $6 million to assassinate the President.
Gillard had testified on the first day of the inquiry that his statement was actually taken by a Narine, and afterwards, three policemen escorted him to Diamond.
Asked by Slowe to relate what Gillard said in his statement, the Sergeant relayed that he was told that Gillard had approached Khan in 2015 to borrow $6 million and Khan had proposed to him that he kill the President in exchange for the money.
He said he was told that shortly after, Nizam went into his house and returned with a “long, black gun” which Gillard held before returning to Nizam, who took it inside. He said Gillard left and returned sometime later, when he turned down the offer.
“After then, he started to get problems with persons in the area, mainly Nizam… he went to Grove Police Station, he reported several of those…the police was not taking action and he was frustrated and that bring him to the CID headquarters,” Pitamber further stated.
Asked under cross-examination by attorney Christopher Ram whether Gillard had been treated as a suspect even though he had been a party to the alleged assassination plot, Pitamber said no.
In Pitamber’s testimony, not only did he say he had been the one to take the statement, he also related that it was he who led a team of two other officers, Jermaine Laundry and Deonarine, to Khan’s house where the allegation was put to him.
According to his testimony, the three of them, along with Gillard, proceeded to Khan’s house at Diamond on the East Bank of Demerara, in an SUV driven by Deonarine.
He reported that when they arrived there, Khan had been in the front yard with another male. He could not say who the male was and related that he had made no attempt to find out, adding that the man had walked away.
The commissioner questioned how it was that he did not see it fit to question everyone, stating that he found this strange given the nature of the investigation.
Pitamber said he approached Khan and told him who he was, then proceeded to put to him the allegation of the assassination plot. He said that Deonarine and Laundry had remained in the car, which was approximately 10 feet away (Slowe actually estimated it to be closer to 15 yards after he asked Pitamber to show the commission the distance he was referring to), but said they should have been able to hear what he was saying as he was speaking loudly. Cautioned him The Sergeant said that after he told Khan of the allegation, he cautioned him, and informed him that he was in receipt of information that he was a licensed firearm holder. The man was then made to hand over his gun, and reportedly produced a firearm licence from a wallet, which had been in his pocket. Pitamber said that the number on the licence corresponded with the gun.
Pitamber, along with Deonarine, then proceeded to search Khan’s premises, in the presence of Khan and his wife, leaving Laundry behind in the car with Gillard. This, he said, took about 45 minutes.
Asked by Slowe whether he had obtained a search warrant, Pitamber said no, and later under cross-examination, related that it was because the situation was a matter of urgency and getting a warrant would take a long time. Asked how long, he responded half an hour.
The sergeant said that Khan was placed under arrest, but he was not cuffed. He later went on to say that they [himself, Khan and Corporal Deonarine], went back to CID using Khan’s vehicle, although he told the commission that he could not recall who drove.
Pitamber’s testimony for the most part corresponded with his colleague, Laundry’s, in terms of the order of events, although there were discrepancies in details.
The first had to do with the initial encounter with Khan.
While Pitamber said that only he had approached the man when they first arrived at his house, Laundry said that all three of the officers had approached Khan when Pitambar told him the allegation, but Gillard had remained next to the vehicle.
The second is the fact that Laundry could not recall Khan producing a firearm licence for the pistol he handed over.
The third, is the fact that Laundry said that the search of the property, the twostorey house including the yard, had taken Pitamber and Deonarine approximately 20 minutes. He also said that from where he was standing, he could see the front and one side of the yard, but said that he did not see the officers search those parts of the premises.
After the search, he reported that Pitamber had told Khan he had to take him to the CID headquarters, but said he could not recall him cautioning the suspect.
Laundry, too, reported that he could not recall who drove Khan’s vehicle to CID, stating it was because he drove ahead. Gillard, however, had testified on Thursday that Khan had driven himself to CID.
CID
Pitamber estimated that they would have left the CID around 4 pm and returned by 6pm on March 29.
He said Gillard gave two further statements that night, but he got no written statement from Khan. He said too that