Regan Rodrigues called ‘Grey Boy,’ was yesterday afternoon freed of the 2015 murder of political activist Courtney Crum-Ewing, after trial Judge Sandil Kissoon upheld a no-case submission made by defence attorney Adrian Thompson.

Finding that there was no case for the accused to answer, the judge directed the jury to return a formal verdict of not guilty, thereby discharging a visibly relieved Rodrigues who was moved to tears.

It had been the prosecution’s case that Rodrigues gunned down Crum-Ewing on the night of March 10th, 2015 at Third Avenue, Diamond Housing Scheme, East Bank Demerara.

Investigators who testified at the trial, had said that the now former-accused had claimed ownership of the gun, which ballistic testing proved was the very firearm used to kill Crum-Ewing.

Rodrigues, however, had denied ever making any such statement to police.

It was upon the ballistic evidence that the prosecution’s case rested solely.

At the conclusion of a preliminary inquiry (PI) on June 5th, 2017, Magistrate Judy Latchman had also found that a prima facie case had not been established and discharged Rodrigues, ruling that there was no case against him.

Two days later, however, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Shalimar Ali-Hack issued a directive to the magistrate to take steps to commit Rodrigues to stand trial in the High Court for the capital offence.

However, Magistrate Latchman maintained that she would be unable to comply with the DPP’s directive, as she had found no evidence presented by the prosecution that it was Rodrigues who killed Crum-Ewing.

After the magistrate made it clear that she was not going to comply with the directive, the DPP commenced proceedings in the High Court, seeking among other things, that she show why her decision to discharge the accused, should not be declared ultra vires, null and void.

Noting her dissatisfaction with a subsequent ruling by Justice Brassington Reynolds, compelling her to act in accordance with the DPP’s ruling, Magistrate Latchman filed an appeal, contending, among other things, that the judge’s decision could not be supported, having regard to the evidence and the law.

That matter is still pending before the appellate court.

Having been previously found not guilty by a magistrate of being in possession of the gun at the centre of the case, Justice Kissoon yesterday noted in his ruling that the prosecution had failed to establish its case against Rodrigues.

Tenuous

“Defective” and “tenuous” were the words used by Justice Kissoon to describe the state’s case against the accused.

On January 11th, 2016 Magistrate Fabayo Azore found Rodrigues not guilty of the gun and ammunition possession charge which was the purported link between him and Crum-Ewing’s murder. Magistrate Azore had said that the prosecution failed to prove that Rodrigues had knowledge and possession of the articles.

Delivering his ruling on the no-case submission, Justice Kissoon yesterday referenced case law authorities by which he said he was guided on the issue, and noted therefrom that having been acquitted of being in possession of the gun which police said was used to kill Crum-Ewing, the capital charge against Rodrigues could proceed no further.

Justice Kissoon pointed out that that gun rested at the centre of the prosecution’s case, and with a not guilty finding that the accused was even in possession of it, it would be an injustice to send the case to the jury.

The judge explained that the acquittal by Magistrate Azore of the unlicensed firearm and possession charge was a finding of fact and law and had been settled by a court of competent jurisdiction, and that issue could therefore not be revisited by the jury.

To so do would be unjust, the judge noted, while adding that the law itself does not so permit.

Justice Kissoon said that with the magistrate having so found; for him to have sent the case to the jury would in essence be inviting the panel to speculate—which the law specifically shuns and with which even the best directions to the jury would be incapable of remedying.

The judge interjected at this point that the burden-of-proof standard which the prosecution had to meet was a finding of guilt “beyond reasonable doubt,” and not merely that the accused might possibly be guilty.

The judge went on to note that the jury could not in essence overrule the magistrate’s finding as; not only is that not justice, but that the law does not so allow. He said that in accordance with the principles of estoppel and res judicata, the matter decided upon by the magistrate regarding the unlicensed gun and ammunition charges could not be revisited by a jury.

The judge emphasized that having regard to the magistrate’s finding, it would have resulted in an inconsistent verdict, were the jury to convict based on the state’s case that Rodrigues was in possession of and had shot Crum-Ewing with the gun in question.

He said that the prosecution needed to establish at a prima face level, that the accused was first, in possession of that gun; which he made clear they failed to do.

Equation

When this is eliminated from the equation, Justice Kissoon said that there remains no evidence by the state against the accused. Against this background, the judge said that he could not call on Rodrigues to mount a defence as he had no case to answer.

The prosecution’s case he said, was therefore “defective” and “tenuous.” The judge then went further to point out that even in examining the alleged oral statements the police said Rodrigues gave, they all attributed to him saying that he “did not” kill Crum-Ewing.

In the circumstances, the judge upheld Thompson’s submissions and directed the jury formally to return a verdict of not guilty in favour of Rodrigues who appeared visibly relieved and was moved to tears after being informed that he was free to go.

In her opening address to the jury on Monday, Prosecutor Tyra Bakker had said that the state would prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that it was Rodrigues who had inflicted the fatal injuries on Crum-Ewing.

Several police witnesses had testified that it was the same gun used to kill Crum-Ewing that had been found in Rodrigues’ Riverview, Ruimveldt residence.

According to the police officers, the accused had admitted ownership of the .32 Taurus pistol which he said he had for some years prior, as a means of protection for his family.

The jury heard from police witnesses that Rodrigues had told them of having bought the gun, which had previously been used to kill someone else.

Thompson, however, challenged the testimonies of the several police officers whom he contended fabricated their stories against his client.

Thompson had said that his client at no time ever made the statements attributed to him by investigators, nor was any search ever conducted at his home or in his presence.

Superintendent of Police Mitchell Caesar had said the accused related that he had had the gun for some years prior which he had bought from a man whom he identified as “Patrick Smith” called “Pragso.”

According to Caesar, the accused then went on to relate that Smith had gotten the gun from his cousin who is incarcerated for the murder of the Rubis Gas Station Accountant at Meadowbrook.

Before the close of the prosecution’s case yesterday, retired Inspector of Police and ballistic expert, Eon Jackson testified that the bullets submitted to him for analysis which investigators had said were retrieved from Crum-Ewing’s body, as well as a number of spent shells and other live rounds belonged to the same gun with which the activist was shot dead.

He told the court that after conducting a microscopic examination, he found that all five fired casings had the same firing pin and striation marks in identical sequence which are unique to each firearm.

He said that like fingerprints, no two firearms would produce the same striation marking sequence, and it was because of this that he was able to conclude that it was the same gun—a .32 Taurus semiautomatic millennium pistol that had been used to kill Crum-Ewing.

Also testifying yesterday was Patholo-gist Dr. Nehaul Singh, who gave the cause of death as haemorrhage and shock due to multiple gunshot injuries. He said that Crum-Ewing was shot five times—at least one at close range to his neck.

The defence’s argument before Magistrate Azore had been that Rodrigues was not there when the gun was found and that in the case that the articles were discovered at the residence, an issue of multiple occupancy arises.

Magistrate Azore had explained that it was up to the prosecution to prove that Rodrigues knew the gun and ammunition existed and had possession and control of the articles.

She had stated that in regards to multiple occupancy, this fact was corroborated by witness testimonies from Rodrigues’ girlfriend as well as a police rank, who testified that he’d had cause to visit the residence on several occasions and knew of others living there at the time.

The magistrate had then gone on to state that the prosecution had not satisfied the court that the defendant had knowledge of the firearm, nor had they led evidence to suggest that he was the owner of the home. Furthermore, the items had not been discovered in Rodrigues’ bedroom or in a public place in the house, but had been concealed, which was enough to create reasonable doubt that the defendant knew of the articles’ existence.

Given these reasons, Rodrigues was found not guilty of the charge.

Crum-Ewing was killed on the evening of March 10, 2015 at Diamond, East Bank Demerara as he was urging residents to vote at the May, 2015 elections. He was shot five times, including three times to the head.

After months of silence, ex-Attorney General Anil Nandlall yesterday denied that he threatened slain political activist Courtney Crum-Ewing or was involved in his murder even as he distanced himself from a former bodyguard who has been arrested in connection with the probe.

At a news conference at the Sleepin Hotel, Nandlall confirmed that he did hire Rajput Narine, who was held on Wednesday, as a bodyguard but emphasised that he did so after Crum-Ewing’s death.

“Why would I retain somebody to be part of a plot? I would have to be very stupid to be involved in Mr. Crum-Ewing’s shooting, then go and hire subsequently a person who apparently has some connection with this killing and then make that person my bodyguard. I have to be insane,” he said.

Narine, who is a former Customs Anti-Narcotic Unit (CANU) officer and a current employee of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA), is one of two men being held by police in connection with the murder. Both he and the other man, who is suspected to be the shooter, remained in police custody up to press time. Police continue to search for a third person.

Crum-Ewing, a 40-year-old father of three, was shot five times on March 10th in the Diamond Housing Scheme, where he was urging persons to head to vote the PPP/C out of office at the May elections.

For weeks he had held a one-man protest outside Nandlall’s office and called for his removal over statements the former AG had made during a telephone conversation with a reporter that was made public.

Nandlall yesterday broke his silence after reports of his association with the Narine were published yesterday morning.

For months it has been alleged that Nandlall and another PPP member had threatened Crum-Ewing, which resulted in a report being lodged at the Brickdam Police Station. This was denied by Nandlall. “I never spoke with Crum-Ewing, I never threatened Crum-Ewing. I had no interaction whatsoever with Mr. Crum-Ewing,” he said.

Prior to the man’s death, he said he was never contacted by the police with regards to the reports and he was not aware of anyone from the party being questioned with respect to the investigation.

Police have consistently sidestepped queries about whether Nandlall and the other person who had allegedly threatened the man were ever questioned as part of the investigation.

Wild allegations

Reading from a prepared statement yesterday, Nandlall emphasised that Narine was hired on March 15th, several days after Crum-Ewing was gunned down. He said he fired Narine four days after he was retained because he was informed that he was giving out information about their whereabouts.

Nandlall said he had hired Narine after he met the man’s brother during a meeting in New York, where he had accompanied former president Donald Ramotar. In New York, he said, Ramotar held several meetings with the Guyanese community and at one of those meetings he met an old acquaintance, Anter Narine.

“As we were chatting, the Crum-Ewing issue came up and I told him that I was advised to hire a personal security upon my return and that I intend to do so,” Nandlall said. Anter Narine, he added, then asked him to consider hiring his brother in Guyana, Rajput Narine, whom he described as a former CANU Officer and a licensed firearm holder and a person that he could trust.

Nandlall said upon his return to Guyana he made contact with the man and later met with him. “I never knew him before, never spoke with him before and never saw him before. I met him on the 15th day of March, 2015, for the first time,” he stressed.

According to Nandlall, he met Narine in the presence of his driver, who did know the man, and learned that he was in the employ of the GRA. He said he wrote the Commissioner General Khurshid Sattaur and requested his secondment. “After about 4 days, I was dissatisfied with his performance, generally. More importantly, my drivers reported that he was disclosing our whereabouts to persons on his telephone. As a result, I told him that I will no longer require his services and sent him away. I took back a vehicle which was assigned to him as a backup to my vehicle,” he said.

He said too that he also informed the Commissioner General in writing that he had fired Narine.

Subsequently, Nandlall said he made a request to the Commissioner of Police for two members of the police force to serve as his security detail. Two officers were subsequently assigned to him, Nandlall said, before adding that they were recalled when he demitted office.

“I hope I have clearly demonstrated that I only came into contact with Rajput Narine after the death of Courtney Crum-Ewing. I take this opportunity to deny any involvement whatsoever in that incident and to say that there is obviously an attempt to implicate me and the PPP in this horrendous act as part of a political design,” he said before voicing his hope that the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Nandlall said that at the time of the murder he was at a political meeting in Timehri, where about 100 people were in attendance. He said that he heard about the death of Crum-Ewing while travelling back to the city and soon after “wild allegations begun to be made, implying that the PPP was involved in this killing.”

When asked for a reaction to revelations made by Shawn Hinds about the PPP’s involvement in extra judicial killings, Nandlall said that he called a press conference to speak only about his name being associated with the Crum-Ewing murder investigation. “The PPP will answer all the questions that you may have…” he said before acknowledging that he is a leader of the party. “Perhaps when I am at Freedom House as part of a PPP press conference I can field those questions but I would not like to deal with these questions here,” he said.

‘Not a security conscious person’

“Perhaps, yes. I am not a security-conscious person and I would admit that perhaps a greater background examination should have been done by me,” he said. In addition to not doing a background check, Nandlall said that he did not ask for any references.

“I assumed that he was a person of good character, that is why he has a firearm licence and that is a ground upon which one gets a firearm licence… that is what the Firearms Act says,” he added.

Asked if he knew who Narine might have been passing the information on his whereabouts to, Nandlall said, “No, no, I don’t. I never inquired. I just felt it was self-defeating and not in the best interest of my personal safety that a person who ought to be responsible for my safety would be disclosing my whereabouts during that period. It was the elections period.”

Pressed on whether he has some suspicions as to who Narine was in communication with, he said, “No. I was busy on the elections campaign trail. I could not at that time entertain any distractions, so I just got rid of what I thought was an unsatisfactory state of affairs.”

Nandlall stated too that he never thought that he should have called in the police after he learnt of the man’s actions. “No. I requested from the police two security details and I got rid of what I thought was a weakness in my security apparatus,” he said before stressing that he did not have reason to go to the police. He informed that the option to get officers from the force to perform protection duties was always available. He went on to explain that he was offered an option to take officers from the force or get his own person security. “I went that way first and when I realised that it didn’t work out, I then resorted to the option to taking officers from the first,” he said.

Asked to explain Sattaur’s granting permission to have Narine transferred to be a personal bodyguard, Nandlall said that the greenlight was given on the same day he hired the man. “Public officers are seconded as far as I am aware from one department or one agency to another. It is not anything unusual,” he said, while noting that Narine, just like a police officer, was a public officer. “I didn’t see any problem in that regard,” he said.

Nandlall said that he has no interest in finding out more about Narine’s arrest. He could not say if the man was associated with the PPP or was a former bodyguard for former Home Affairs Minister Ronald Gajraj.

Stabroek News has learnt that Narine worked at CANU for about 10 years before migrating. When he returned several years ago, he had reapplied to CANU but was turned down. He later landed a job at GRA.

Fearful

Meanwhile, Nandlall said that he was concerned about his safety. “My desire has always been to serve the people. I have no other objective. I have no other aspiration. And when one looks at the problems that befall you as you attempt to do public service, then you really have to question and consider whether it is worth it. I left a very successful legal practice to enter into government and to serve the people of Guyana and you have to face all of these problems. At some point in time, as a human being, you have to do an introspection and see whether it is worth it. There is so much ingratitude in doing what you set out to do,” he said.

Asked if he was suggesting plans to bring an end to his political career, Nandlall said no and added that he was just taking into account what is happening now. “I am saying that I am doing some introspection to see whether this entire thing is worth it,” he said.

Much of Nandlall’s woes began after the recorded phone conversation between him and Kaieteur News reporter Leonard Gildarie was released late last year. In the expletive-laden conversation which was recorded by Kaieteur News, Nandlall is heard issuing threats and soliciting information on a KN reporter who his uncle wanted to have a relationship with. Ironically, it was the revelations in this conversation which prompted Crum-Ewing to picket Nandlall’s office on a daily basis.

Meanwhile as it relates to the Crum-Ewing investigation, Crime Chief Wendell Blanhum said that the two men in custody were further questioned yesterday. He said that another individual, who is being sought, is yet to be arrested.

The other man in custody is a remanded prisoner who police managed to link to the crime through an illegal gun which was found in his home last Monday. When police descended on his Georgetown home, acting on information received, the man fled. However, he turned himself in the following day and was later placed before the court on a gun charge. Ballistic tests conducted on the .32 pistol matched the Crum Ewing crime scene.