THE teenager on trial for murder at the Berbice Assises has raised the issue of self defence, as he opted to make an unsworn statement from the dock before Justice Roxanne George, at the Berbice Assizes.

Following addresses by state counsel, Prithima Kissoon and defence counsel, Kumar Doraisami, the judge has adjourned the hearings to today when she is expected to present the case to the 12-member mixed jury.
Meanwhile, Rayan Ali called Karan, speaking from the dock told the court that after awaking he had gone to his aunt’s house for breakfast and thereafter rested his shoulder on a utility post with folded hands. But, on looking backwards he saw ‘Copper,’ the deceased armed with a cutlass.
‘I moved forward, and he came behind me and broadsided me. An iron was lying right next to me, and I picked it up with my right hand and as he fired chops at me, I lashed him on the left side. If I did not lash him, he would have killed me,’ he concluded.
Doraisami, a former Commissioner of Lands, urged the jury to believe the statement given by the accused to the police on July 10, 2011 along with the unsworn statement in the dock and the evidence of Nalini Ragnauth in order to return a verdict of not guilty to the capital offence.
He highlighted the fact that the teen was just age 15 years old ‘as a young man he has a future and you can make him or break him’.
Focusing on the evidence of the state’s two eyewitnesses, namely 13-year old Gomattie Singh and her father Ram Singh, the former magistrate, observed that the two witnesses saw differently, as they were unable to correctly identify the clothing which adorned the accused body, and in which hand the weapon was held, amongst other inconsistencies.
But state counsel, Kissoon in an highly emotional plea urged the jury to examine the evidence with mature deliberation, as the deceased Premchan Sugrim, died on July 20, 2011 as a result of a grievous wound inflicted on him by the accused.
‘You will have doubts. None of you were there to witness. No two persons witnessing an event will be exact. It will be different.’
She acknowledged that while Singh evidence somewhat conflicts that of his daughter Gomattie, with respect to which hand the weapon was held. ‘The defence however, did not put the question- you did not see the accused’ and the evidence was not discredited by the defence.
Rehashing the state’s case, the prosecutor said that the accused came out of a clump of bushes and lashed ‘Copper’ on his head. The difficulty, she noted is whether he had it in his right or his left hand.
The older Singh who was closer, said it was in the left hand, but his daughter who was some distance away, said it was in the right hand. ‘The accused said he hit the deceased to his head.
Ms. Kissoon said the post-mortem report is unchallenged and the fracture at the right side is as a result of being hit with a iron bar.
She also brought to attention of the jury that if the deceased had intended to fatally injure the accused, he could have done so when his nephew was unarmed.
‘All the now deceased did was to lash him on his buttocks earlier. The eyewitnesses did not reveal that ‘Copper’ attacked the accused, but it was the accused who came out of a clump of bushes and inflicted the fatal injuries. He was not acting in self defence,’ Ms, Kissoon submitted.
Reminding the mixed jury of their duty, Kissoon said: ‘You are not to have sympathy for anyone. You are here to execute your duty in the administration of justice. Look at the facts and determine what you believe and what you reject’.
Earlier, Government Pathologist, Dr Nehaul Singh in a detailed description of the deceased injury, noted that death was due to cerebral haemorrhage with necrosis as a result of blunt cerebral trauma. Other aligning diagnosis recorded is portal cirrhosis and fibinous pleuritis.