The trial into the alleged attempts to commit fraud during the 2020 Elections resumed this morning in the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court with the Defense Attorneys repeatedly objecting to an application by the Prosecution for former Executive Member of The New Movement (TNM), Josh Kanhai to submit an additional statement to the Court.

State Prosecutor Latchmie Rahamat, in her oral application, told the acting Chief Magistrate, Faith McGusty that the witness wanted to provide the Court with additional information not detailed in his statement provided to the police prior to the start of the trial.

According to the Rahamat, the witness wants to “flesh out” aspects of his statement on the events that unfolded during the March 2020 General and Regional Elections.

Offering further clarification, Prosecutor Madana Rampersaud explained that the added statement would detail events that unfolded between March 3, 2020 and March 13, 2020.

But their application was met with objections by the defense team, with Attorney-at-Law, Eusi Anderson telling the Court that it would be prejudicial and unfair to the defendants for the Court to approve such an application. He emphasized that the trial has long commenced.

“I am firmly of the view that if the statement is allowed at this stage, then we no longer have a constitution, we no longer have fairness to the defense,” he said while emphasizing that the Prosecution has a duty to be fair to the people of Guyana, who include the defendants in the case.

Defense Attorney, Dexter Todd added that it would be “unfair” to the defendants to allow the statement in the middle of the trial. He pointed out that a number of witnesses have already testified, and have been cross-examined based on the evidence before the Court.

“The issue of bringing a witness statement now, whether it is to clarify, whether it is to expand, I believe it would be prejudicial at this stage. It would really be unfair to the defendants, who have been in this matter for a long while,” Todd told the Court.

Attorney-at-Law Nigel Hughes added that Kanhai is not merely attempting to submit an “added” statement, but rather to submit fresh information.

“If he is making a statement now for the first time about the events between the 3^rd and the 11^th that impacts the preparation of our defense, it impacts how we would have attacked previous submissions, and the cross-examination of the witnesses,” Hughes argued.  

He argued that it calls into question the fairness of the trial, and could very well force the Court to call back all those witnesses who have testified, and have already been cross-examined by the defense.

Hughes said it could not be that Kanhai is coming to present the Court with information he had already presented, noting that if that is the case there is no reason for him to submit an additional statement. 

“If, however, he is coming to say something new, disclosing that statement puts us in a prejudice,” Hughes emphasized.

Pointing out that the statement, in which Kanhai hopes to be admitted into evidence has no date, Hughes expressed concern that it could very well be a ploy to rectify problems in the Prosecution’s case.

Acting Chief Magistrate McGusty upon hearing the arguments instructed the two sides to make written submissions.

Given the issues surrounding the application, and the initial arguments put forward by the defense, the Court took a decision not to continue with the cross-examination of Jonathan Yearwood until further notice.

Yearwood, who was present in Court was expected to return to the witness box today. Instead, the Court heard from Assistant Superintendent of Police, Lalbachan Dyal.

Dyal was an Inspector of Police, and Head of the Bomb Disposal Unit during the Course of the 2020 Elections.

Dyal recalled responding to a bomb threat at the Ashmins Building on March 5, 2020. He said upon the arrival of his team to conduct a bomb sweep, those present were instructed to evacuate the building, but no one left.

Dyal said after waiting for more than one hour, he was instructed to return to Police headquarters by his superiors and so he left with his team. The defense, however, questioned his expertise and knowledge of explosives such as C4.

The Court also took a decision to visit the Ashmins Building, which served as the Region 4 Returning Office during the last elections. The visit will be conducted on Wednesday.

Former Chief Elections Officer (CEO), Keith Lowenfield; the former Deputy Chief Elections Officer (DCEO) Roxanne Myers and former Region 4 Returning Officer (RO) Clairmont Mingo are among those on trial.

The other defendants are: Member of Parliament, Volda Lawrence; People’s National Congress Reform (PNC/R) Member Carol Smith-Joseph; and Election Officers Sheffern February, Enrique Livan, Denise Bobb-Cummings and Michelle Miller.

They are facing 19 conspiracy charges relating to an attempt to declare fraudulent results during the course of the 2020 Elections. They have denied the charges.

Related posts:

Election Fraud case restarts as first witness is called and additional Prosecution and Defence Attorneys make appearance Prosecution and Defence in Election Fraud case to begin oral arguments on December 9 Election Fraud Trial: Prosecution and Defence clash over objections and other issues Electoral Fraud case opens with Local Government Minister as first witness; Defence objects to some of her testimony