.jpg)
The first two days of the commission’s operation saw Police Commissioner (ag) Leroy Brumell, DSM, being cross-examined by the defence attorneys, the CoI attorneys, and the Guyana Police Force attorney. The acting Police Commissioner provided satisfactory information to the Commission of Inquiry.
The second day’s hearing commenced with questions and queries based on the Activity and Unit books and the names of the ranks, dates, types of weapons and amounts of rounds taken before leaving for Linden on the morning of 18th July 2012.
Questioning elicited varying information, and both the chairman and commissioner K.D. Knights sought the author of the entries to come forth and clearly explain the information contained in both books.
Attorney Hughes was able to indentify the names of the ranks in the Activity Book as against the ranks in the Unit Book, so he sought clarification as to those entries highlighted and those struck out, since the police commissioner could not give a clear answer for the developments.
Asked about the requirements for membership of the Tactical Services Unit (TSU), the Commissioner confirmed that prior service of two years’ duration in the Guyana Police Force is a requirement for being considered for transfer to the TSU, and additional training is provided to bring the transferee up to the required standard of the unit.
Hughes then questioned the Commissioner about the activities on the day of July 18th, regarding telephone conversation with the Minister of Home Affairs before and after the time of the shooting at the Mackenzie Bridge.
The Commissioner provided detailed answers to the questions asked, although some brought intervention for clarity from members of the commission, who also got the clear picture unfolding from the interchange.
Excerpts from statements of two eye witnesses were read to the Commissioner , seeking explanation of the standard operating procedure of the Guyana Police Force in certain events. This request again saw intervention from members of the commission of inquiry as they sought to clarify certain aspects of the answers and negate further questioning.
Commissioner K.D Knights then advised the attorney on the line they should take, and the chairman adjourned the morning’s session.
On resumption of the afternoon session, more questions flowed from Attorney Nigel Hughes regarding the issues highlighted in the Activity and Unit Books; and Brumell explained that the writer of the entries in the books was available to explain and clarify all the necessary details regarding the issue at hand.
Brumell was then asked to clarify whether he had received information and/or instructions from the Minister of Home Affairs before and/or after the shooting incident.
Hughes asked Brummell who had initiated the calls, seeking to know if the minister had first called the Commissioner , or whether the Commissioner had first called the minister. Brummell answered that it was he who had first called the minister.
Hughes then asked Brumell who had initiated the call to Senior Superintendent Hicken, and the Brummell said he had, since he wanted to have first-hand information on what was taking place, and why the protesters were not moving from the bridge.
Brummell said he continued to insist that Senior Superintendent Hicken return to the bridge and speak to the protesters, their leaders and others in an effort to get them to remove, since it was getting dark.
Brummell told Hughes that Hicken told him the situation at the bridge had become unmanageable. He said Hicken had said that the protesters were throwing bottles and stones at the police ranks as they tried to talk them off the Mackenzie Bridge.
Brummell said he never gave Senior Superintendent Hickens any further instruction, but received information from the media that there had been a shooting and that three persons had been killed.
Hicken had been summoned to the Commissioner’s office, where he had been debriefed and re-sent to the Linden division, but was later recalled to Force Headquarters.
Asked if that was the normal procedure for a Senior Superintendent to be debriefed by a Commissioner, Brumell replied affirmatively.
The question was then asked about the Senior Superintendent’s involvement in the shooting incident, and Brumell denied knowledge of this.
Brumell said that Officer Hicken had been described with a number of unprofessional adjectives which he, as commissioner, found to be untrue; and he, Brumell, decided to make a decision in the interest of the Guyana Police Force. Thus he removed Hicken and Asst Supt Todd, replacing them with a senior, mature officer.
Police attorney Hukumchand, in his cross-examination of the Commissioner , asked who applied for permission for the march, and was told it was the Regional Chairman Mr. Sharma Solomon, to whom guidelines for such activity were clearly outlined.
This activity was a peaceful march until the marchers arrived at and blocked the bridge, installing tents and music boxes, and converting the bridge into a camping ground, Brumell explained.
The police attorney continued to seek the details of the day in question from the police commissioner, who could not answer his line of questioning, and caused the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry to intervene, giving guidance to the questions asked as the attorney concluded his cross-examination.
The session was adjourned until today, when Senior Superintendent Clifton Hicken, Assistant Superintendent P. Todd, Sergeant Bowman and Constable Grant will take the witness stand to be cross-examined.
