Boxing Day Patentia murder accused say deceased was aggressor

Patentia miner Sunil Ramsundar died from shock due to haemorrhaging caused by a puncture wound to the left thoracic artery in his neck, Pathologist Dr Vivekanand Bridgemohan testified yesterday. Bridgemohan, who was testifying at the trial of murder accused Vishwantie Ragnauth and Nyron Thakurdyal, also stated that it was likely that a person would have died shortly after such a wound was inflicted because of excessive bleeding and that the puncture was most likely caused by a knife.

Ragnauth and Thakurdyal are on trial for allegedly murdering Ramsundar on December 26th, 2014. They led their defence yesterday with unsworn statements in which they said the deceased had braced Ragnauth against a fence and Thakurdyal had pulled him off.

On Monday, Ramsundar’s daughter, Zalena Ramsundar, had testified that she witnessed the events leading up to her father’s death. The girl had stated that she saw Ragnauth and Thakurdyal in an altercation with her father, and that she saw them hitting him about the body with cuffing motions. She said that when she arrived there, her father’s jersey was blood-soaked and he was in a sitting position, braced against the fence.

She, however, had admitted that she had not seen a knife at the scene.

A knife presented in court yesterday most closely resembled a chef’s knife, with a wide body and curved tip.

The pathologist had said that the puncture wound, which was in fact one of several injuries documented in the post-mortem report, was circular in shape. Other injuries observed on the body of the deceased were a cut on the outside of the mouth, a cut on the left side of his jaw bone, an oval shaped incised wound on the forearm, a cut on the left palm and small abrasions to the side of the neck. Internally, there was excessive bleeding around the esophagus.

Bridgemohan explained that the circular puncture wound to the neck could have been created by the knife, depending on the amount of pressure that was exerted.

With moderate pressure, the knife, with its sharp tip, could have created a circular wound, he said. With added pressure, and given the elasticity of the skin, an oval wound would have resulted, Bridgemohan further explained.

Defence attorney Nigel Hughes, during crossexamination, attempted to establish the possibility that another object, not necessarily a knife, could have resulted in the puncture described in the autopsy report.

Hughes asked whether Bridgemohan’s assumption that the wound was caused by the knife was not based on the premise that it was present at the scene and also used at the time, to which the pathologist responded in the affirmative.

The attorney had also enquired if it is not usually the case that circular wounds are created by circular objects, to which the doctor said “not necessarily” but then responded with “yes” when asked if it “most often” is.

Hughes also asked if it were not possible that another object, protruding from the paling of the fence, had caused the puncture. Bridgemohan said that it was possible given the right conditions, including the angle at which the body would have fallen and the position of the object.

Bridgemohan, however, under re-examination by prosecutor Lisa Cave, stated that based on his observations, it was more likely that the puncture wound was caused by a knife and not another object. (It was inaccurately reported on Monday that prosecutor Cave led the evidence-inchief of witness Zalena Ramsundar; it was in fact prosecutor Orinthia Schmidth. The two are prosecuting the case jointly.)

He had admitted, though, during crossexamination, that he has not seen the fence referred to by Hughes in his questioning.

Questions were also directed to the pathologist by the jury.

It was asked how common it is for a knife to cause a circular wound. Bridgemohan said that it depends on the “configuration” of the knife and added that while it is not very common, the particular knife in question is sharp and narrow.

Questioned as to whether the fatal wound was inflicted from in front or behind the deceased, he could not say. On whether the cut found in the palm appeared to be a defensive injury, Bridgemohan responded yes. Under