Website publication mentioned as…
LEADER of the Justice For All Party (JFAP) and Channel Six television owner, Chandra Narine Sharma was yesterday slapped with another charge of attempting to obstruct the course of justice. He appeared before Acting Chief Magistrate Melissa Robertson and was put on $150,000 bail despite an objection by Special Prosecutor Sanjeev Datadin.

The latest indictable charge against him said, between June 17 and 24, he willfully obstructed the course of justice by communicating with two witnesses in the criminal case involving him, causing them to change their testimony.

Defence Counsel Nigel Hughes and Vic Puran entered appearance for Sharma.
Hughes said, when the accused was first charged, they made no comments about the motivation for the charges but it has now become evident that the prosecution is politically driven.

He said he is appalled to learn that, recently, the statements by the virtual complainant, in Sharma’s carnal knowledge case have been published on an Internet website.

Hughes said, during the course of the trial, the Guyana Police Force (GPF) was given the depositions and, somehow, the entire statement by the minor was published on the website.

The lawyer said what compounds the publication is that the headline is ‘Statements leaked from Guyana Police Force.’
Hughes said this development questions the new Sexual Offences Act because women, in general, would lose confidence in the GPF and even be afraid to give evidence in Court.
Datadin said Hughes’ submission does not apply to the present proceedings but the latter said the State is obligated to protect the virtual complainant in the matter.
“Sharma has no access to the statements and he is now being charged for taking the statements. There is either a leak of information from the Police Force or it was done intentionally or gross negligence. With all this, yet the Police did not attempt to make an arrest of the person who hosts the website.
Instead they brought another charge to Mr. Sharma. The confidence in the Police Force has been totally shattered and it is frightening,” Hughes declared.
He said the virtual complainants in the new matter are adult sisters of the virtual complainant in the carnal knowledge case and they were in protective custody but left on their own.
Hughes said they were later interviewed by two journalists who questioned their circumstance of giving statements to the Police against Sharma and they gave a full interview of how they were coaxed into giving statements against Sharma and that was broadcast by several television stations.
INTERVIEW
He said, after the interview, the women were re-arrested and taken back into protective custody and Sharma, subsequently, charged.
Hughes said the women never told the Police that Sharma caused them to change their statements but the Police insisted on charging him.
Datadin strongly objected to the grant of pre-trail freedom to Sharma, on the ground that there is a likelihood the accused would commit more offences of a similar nature.
The Prosecutor said, at no time, were the virtual complainants ever arrested or in protective custody.
He said the new charge against Sharma is specific and the Police are presently investigating the alleged publications on the website.
Hughes maintained that the virtual complainants in the matter were, indeed, taken into Police custody and said he and another lawyer were present to represent the women.
However, Datadin admitted that, from time to time, the women are called in by the Police, as they are witnesses in a criminal matter.
He said the women never requested lawyers but were taken, by the accused, to a lawyer’s office to give a statement.
Datadin said, subsequent to the carnal knowledge charge against Sharma, there were other charges against him and his employees, of obstructing the course of justice.
Datadin said it is believed that the accused will continue to interfere with witnesses in the case although no accused is entitled to speak or communicate with a virtual complainant in a matter, because, to do so is to perverse the course of justice.
In response, Hughes said all the Prosecutor can do is file more charges of the same nature as there is a specific purpose to target his client.
The new case was transferred to another Court for September 3.
Sharma was, initially, charged on April 20, with having carnal knowledge of a 13-year-old girl and put on $2M bail and on April 26, he was further charged with obstructing the course of justice and ordered to post a $100,000 bond.
The preliminary inquiries (PIs) in those cases are ongoing.