DEPUTY Police Commissioner Seelall Persaud, Crime Chief of the Guyana Police Force, told the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into the July 18th shooting at Linden that the police conducted investigations which revealed that persons other than the police were responsible for the deaths that occurred on that fateful day. At the time he made this disclosure, he had been called to give evidence to the CoI. He detailed the investigations he had ordered into the activities reported on July 18th at the Mackenzie Bridge, disclosing he had sent to Linden a team of investigators headed by Detective Superintendent Ramraj.

That team arrived in Linden sometime after lunch on July 19, and commenced interviews and visits to the various scenes. At the hospital, the team received minimum cooperation from the injured persons, some even refused to give the police statements.

The Crime Chief explained that the ammunition found in the bodies of the dead persons were OO buckshot, which had not been issued to ranks on the day in question, and which had not been used by the Guyana Police Force since 2005.
That alone, he said, told him that someone other than the police had to have been responsible for the shooting deaths of the three protesters.

Commission member Justice KD Knight asked Crime Chief Seelall Persaud about the local dealers of ammunition; and whether the police had available, or had even requested, a list of the ammunition sellers’ inventory and other records from January 1st to July 19th, 2012, and their details of sales and who had purchased ammunition during the period July 1st to 19th, 2012.

Telephone records were again the subject of questioning by attorney for the deceased, Mr. Nigel Hughes, as the Crime Chief said he could only recall speaking to then commander of E&F Division, Senior Superintendent Clifton Hicken, after 7pm on the evening of the day of the shooting, and could not recall any other phone call or its content.

The Crime Chief did not deny that he had made telephone contact with Commander Hicken when the records were shown to him, but explained that a group of senior officers had also been in contact with the commander, and several phones had been used on that day.

Asked if he knew the number of Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee’s direct line, Persaud said he did not know that number, but he normally accesses the minister through someone else.

Persaud was asked if he knew cell number 622-6592, and he said that number belonged to Senior Supt Hicken. He explained that he did not commit it to memory because he has it in his cell phone.

Asked why the weapons had not been taken for ballistics testing since the shooting incident, Persaud explained that he did not think that exercise necessary, since the UK weapons expert had concluded after his examination that the fatal bullets were not police-issued.

Detective Inspector Leroy Alexander, who was a part of the investigating team, told the CoI that, while in Linden, he and other ranks had had great difficulty in getting the injured persons to cooperate whilst conducting investigations.

Alexander said he had visited homes after being given addresses, and had sometimes found no one at home to receive him.

Asked about the scene of the shooting, and if he had found any evidence to incriminate the police, Alexander said he had spent a period of time at the bridge searching for evidence of the shooting,  but had found nothing of incriminating value.

He noted that when he arrived at the bridge, he had seen the Linmine secretariat on fire, and it was totally destroyed; and there were reports about arson being committed on other buildings, vehicles and other properties.

Police Constable 21609 Colin Rodney was then called to the witness stand, and he gave details of his activities as a member of the Linden Anti-Crime Unit under the command of Station Sergeant English on the day in question.

Rodney detailed the duties of the unit to which he had been assigned, and the movements of the unit on the day in question, as he told the CoI of the first visit of the TSU unit to the bridge, and how the unit had been approached by angry protesters, forcing the police to retreat.

He said he had felt fearful for his life and for the safety of the unit, and had loaded his shotgun at the bridge during the formation, as was shown earlier on a video footage.

He explained that the TSU unit made a second visit to the bridge, and his unit had been instructed to provide cover as the TSU Unit commander, ASP Todd, began executing Standard Operational Procedure (SOP) in announcing to the protesters the command to disperse and go home. He said a few complied with the instruction, but the majority remained on the bridge and began chanting at the police.

He noted that a banner had been hoisted and the siren had sounded a number of times as ASP Todd and his unit began advancing to clear the bridge.

Tear smoke had been fired in a bid to have the protesters remove from the bridge, even as the unit continued advancing.

At the entrance to the bridge, the unit attempted to remove the blockage from the bridge, but came under a hail of stones and bottles from protesters, so the TSU commander continued to fire tear smoke.

During this period, he indicated, his unit kept the eastern end of the bridge, where the TSU unit had begun their formation. He said Sgt. English informed him that a nearby building had been set alight, and he and two other ranks had accompanied the Sgt to the site of that fire.

He recalled that on arrival there, they had met about 70 – 80 persons, who had broken all the windows at the GRA building and had started a small fire within the edifice and the guard hut.
He said he was ordered to fire in the air a shot from his shotgun to scare off the protesters as the lawmen extinguished the fire and secured the building.

Minutes later, the sergeant received further information that the Linmine Secretariat was on fire, and they again left to answer that call when they encountered another group of about 60 protesters.

They saw another building had been set alight, and the fire tender was summoned, but could not reach the location because blockages had restricted access to the building.

The small group of lawmen was then told of a fire at the PPP/C regional office, where they had to journey by foot to the industrial area. On arrival there, about 200 persons were in the compound and building, and a small fire had been started.

Two shots were then fired in the air to scare the protesters, and the police had to escort the fire unit to respond to that emergency. That building was saved, but its interior was damaged, and all equipment destroyed.

They then returned to the Mackenzie Police Station.

Questioned by attorney Nigel Hughes about the type of weapon he had, and if it had been sent for testing, if he had given a statement of the events, and the procedure in formation, Rodney detailed his answers to the attorney.

Attorney for the owners of properties which were damaged sought to determine the period between the first and third fires, and how long the mob and the policemen had been at each fire. She was given detailed answers to all her questions.

Police Station Sergeant English was recalled to the witness stand, and he provided documents he had been summoned to produce to the CoI. However, he later found himself unable to explain to APNU attorney Basil Williams the details of the documents.

A number of flaws were unearthed as the sergeant accepted that the information supplied was not true, even as he gave details of what had transpired on that fateful day.

He was later released, giving opportunity to Hector Solomon Snr. and Ralph Green to give evidence in the hope of receiving compensation.

The commission will continue its hearings today at 9 am.