Oral sex accusation versus a hitman’s confession

DECEMBER 5, 2015 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES / COLUMNISTS, FREDDIE KISSOON

How do the police operate in circumstances where John says Mary called him a thief and Mary says he is lying? I am inquisitive, because I read in the Kaieteur News where a City Constabulary rank was miraculously placed on $5000 bail by a Magistrate for requesting oral sex from one of his colleagues. The Kaieteur News published $5000 which caught my eyes, because Magistrates these days only think of bail in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, even if it is for bicycle theft. This is a curious case against the backdrop of the Robb Street granny murder trial. The city rank requested oral sex. How did he come to be charged once he denied it? It meant that the police proceeded because there were witnesses. There is no other explanation. Once it is one person’s word against another, how do the police proceed? All Mary has to say is that I never called John a thief. All Mary has to say is that he is lying and he cannot prove it. Proof is the fulcrum on which rests a prosecution’s case. If there is no proof, how can the police file a charge? Suppose Peter is leaving a café and on his way out he asks the attendant for oral sex. The woman calls in the police; Peter says this woman is crazy; she is just mischievous because I refused to tip her. Surely there has to be evidence or proof. If the police charge Peter, then the jungle opens up, because all kinds of mischievous people will create perpetual strife by accusing others they hate. But the reality in Guyana is that the police do exactly this, and continue to do it, but with exceptions. I will come to the exceptions below. All you have to do to get a person placed in the police lock-up at any station, is just complain that you were threatened. I have seen this untold number of times and I have intervened at police stations untold number of times, the latest being a bicycle incident at the Kitty Police Station. I was investigating a car accident which took me to the station. I saw this fellow from the vulcanizing shop on Sheriff Street who tends to my car wheels. His name is Sammy. On enquiry I was told that a young man made an accusation against Sammy, saying Sammy is in possession of his cycle. Sammy was sitting on the bench for hours. The police seized the bike. I spoke to the three policemen over the counter requesting that the bicycle be released to me because it was mine and I had given it to Sammy. They were all laughing. I became annoyed and insisted that they take a report from me. When they saw I was angry they calmed down and asked what I was getting at. My point was simple – how can you have the poor soul sitting on a bench for hours, while his accuser is nowhere in sight and he should have supplied proof of ownership hours ago. So to be provocative, I claimed the bike insisting Sammy must be released until his accuser brings the receipt. They agreed. Three weeks after I asked Sammy for an update. There was none. The police didn’t arrest Sammy, meaning that his accuser did not bring in the receipt and Sammy’s bike was still impounded. I insisted that Sammy has to get what was taken from him by the police. We collected the bike. What’s the point? The point is the arbitrary way the Guyana Police Force operates and its harassment of poor people is unconscionable. The police had an innocent man confined for hours at the station and impounded his bike on the fictional description of a mischievous person. Sammy could have been placed in the lock-up with seasoned criminals. I won’t be surprised if the police acted in the same manner with the oral sex allegation. Let’s return to the exceptions alluded to above. Where and who is Satesh? One of the accused in the Robb Street granny murder trial gave a statement that Satesh from a car importation firm wanted the granny dead, and that he was paying a million dollars to get her killed. But the police did not act the way they did with Sammy. The police did not act the way they did with the oral sex charge. Satesh was never sought by the police. The police said they didn’t know who Satesh was. Was the car importation owner interrogated? After all the hitman could have been lying, so why bother to look for Satesh and the car firm owner. If you believe that, you are a fool.