Charge re-read following attorney’s argument
The four soldiers accused of robbing a mining camp at Five Star Back Dam, North West District were yesterday placed on bail in the sum of $100,000 each when they appeared before Magistrate Allen Wilson at the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court.
It is alleged that on May 28 in the North West District, Lancelot Gordon, 21, of 224 Steven Street, South Sophia; Orvin Woodroffe, 27, of Leitchfield, West Coast Berbice; 20-year-old Shawn Lord of 4 Old Road Blankenburg, West Coast Demerara and Teon Moffat, 22, who resides at 85 South Haslington, East Coast Demerara, being armed with guns, robbed Selso Da Silva of 1 ½ ounces of raw gold valued $246,000 property of Francisco Da Silva.
The jointly-charged quartet was not required to
plead to the indictable charge of robbery under arms
when it was read to them.
Attorneys-at-law Vic Puran and Gregory Gaskin who
represented the accused made lengthy submissions to
the court positing reasons why their clients should
be granted bail.
Puran, in his bail application argued that the charge levelled against the quartet was trumped out and baseless. According to Puran, the court could not entertain an application made by the State in relation to the accused persons since they were held in excess of 72 hours.
“My Worship, these men were kept in police custody and have been brought before this court in violation of their constitutional rights. They were held by the police for more than six days when the constitution only permits for a three-day detention. Sir, what this honourable court has been asked to do, is to clone illegality with legality,” Puran argued, adding that if this were to be done, the court would be subjecting itself to an abuse of the process by the Executive.
Police Prosecutor Lloyd Thomas who at one point had his facts all mixed up in relation to the particulars of the charge, in objecting to bail, asked that the quartet be denied bail on the grounds that the offence was a prevalent and serious one and added that the accused persons, if granted bail could possibly tamper with the witnesses.
Puran however maintained that the charge brought against the accused was unconstitutional, baseless and unlawful since the defendants were held in excess of 72 hours. He held that the State and police failed to obtain an order from the High Court that would have given them the legal right to detain the soldiers for more than 72 hours. Since this wasn’t done, Puran held that the charges were unlawful in nature and requested of the Magistrate that he send the accused persons out of the courtroom and have the charge re-read to them when they re-entered, so that it could be deemed a legal one.
Having listened to the points listed by the prosecution and the defence, the Magistrate granted Puran’s application, sending the defendants out of the courtroom and having them come back in. The charge was then read once again
The Prosecutor then again asked that bail be refused and requested that the file be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions for further advice.
At this point, Puran asked that the prosecutor supply the court with the particulars of what had transpired on the day in question. Thomas then replied that on the day in question, each of the defendants, being armed with an AK 47 rifle invaded the mining camp, robbing the virtual complainant (VC) of the articles mentioned in the charge.
Thomas then added, much to the surprise of the crowded courtroom, that the number one accused, [Gordon], was found with two ounces, 18 pennyweights of gold and a quantity of cash on his person.
With a perplexed look on his face, the Magistrate
then said, “but that is not what the charge
indicated, so what is really happening?” he asked.
“Yes, my Worship,” Thomas replied after a pause,
and continued, “the charge said only 1 ½ ounces
of gold, but further searches unearthed that the
number one defendant had two ounces, 18 pennyweights
of gold and a quantity of cash on his person.”
“Well, we’re dealing with what is in the
charge,” the Magistrate advised.
Supporting Puran with whom he appeared in association, Gaskin in his submission also said that the charge was baseless. Stating that the accused persons had no previous antecedents, Gaskin added that on the day in question, they were on lawful patrol and that the AK 47 rifles that they were carrying was a soldier’s tool and a part of their kit. “They are also expected to carry it in an aggressive manner, not as a walking stick,” he argued.
Gaskin said also, that the patrol upon which his clients were, had been authorised by the relevant authorities. “They were sent to protect our country’s borders and to stop illegal mining and that is exactly what they were doing.” Gaskin also pondered, “Who did they rob? I cannot imagine that someone would be robbed under arms and not be in court to tell their side of the story. As a matter of fact, this said VC and the other miners of the camp had invited these four men to have lunch and stay for the night, I can’t imagine either that someone who had been robbed would actually invite their perpetrator to lunch.”
My worship, it is upon these grounds that I, like my colleague maintain that these are baseless charges that were trumped up against our clients and as a result, our respectful application is that bail be granted them in a reasonable sum and if not granted bail we are asking that they be placed in a safe environment so as to avoid victimisation.”
According to Puran, the prosecution had been unable to advance one jurisprudential reason as to why the accused persons should be denied bail. “My worship, the Prosecutor has spoken about the seriousness of the offence, but if this offence was indeed as serious as it is being made out to be, then the State Prosecutor should have presided over the matter and not just a lay prosecutor. Added to that, the point that there could be possible witness tampering is also baseless since no one has since taken to the witness stand, where are the witnesses?” Puran asked. “Bail my Worship, is just to ensure that the defendants return to court and I see no reason why they should be denied same.
The army in a release, almost one week after the allegation was made, stated that members of a GDF investigative team who had received reports of the robbery allegation intercepted the patrol of one officer and three ranks and found the gold and cash.
They were granted $100,000 bail each and had their matter transferred to the Matthew’s Ridge Magistrate’s Court for August 4.