A judge at the High Court in New
Amsterdam yesterday quashed the committal
for the trial of a man who allegedly
murdered his wife by setting her on fire.
David Ramdehol was on trial for
murdering Barbara Thayloo, his reputed wife,
on July 13, 2003.
His lawyer had last Wednesday objected to
the dying declaration made by the deceased
to her sister and this led to a voir dire (a
trial within a trial).
Justice Rishi Persaud
quashed the committal after taking into
consideration that there was no indication
on record that the magistrate told the
accused of his rights at the end of the
preliminary inquiry (PI).
The judge was also not satisfied that
Section 66 of the Criminal Law Offences Act
Chapter 10:01 was put to the accused.
This section states that at the end of
the PI the magistrate shall ask the accused
whether he wished to call any witnesses.
The judge also considered that the
accused was unrepresented at that trial and
there was evidence that he could not read or
Justice Persaud also considered the
nature of the charge and that there was no
indication that the accused would not have
According to evidence by the accused, the
magistrate never asked him if he had
witnesses to call.
The magistrate had given evidence that if
he had asked this of the accused, he would
have recorded it. This was not in the
The prosecution's case was that Thayloo
was deliberately set alight by her reputed
She was seen running from her home
covered in flames and later died at the New
Amsterdam Hospital from her injuries.
The prosecutor was Nyasha Williams and
the lawyer for the defence was Motee Singh.