By Ariana Gordon

AS testimonies into the Georgetown prison riots that resulted in the death of 17 inmates and injury of several others continue, it became evident that there were conflicting views as they relate to what transpired in the Camp Street facility on March 3.Prisoner Desmond James told the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) yesterday that his fellow inmates were not angered when their prohibited items were seized by prison authorities on March 2.
James noted that the prison authority would on an almost monthly basis conduct searches in the Capital ‘A’ Division of the prison. It was a regular feature at the penitentiary and as such seizures were expected.

“I NEVER SEE NO CELL PHONES, ICE PICKS…”
Noting that he did not own a mobile phone, did not borrow phones belonging to other inmates nor did he see marijuana in the Camp Street jail, the murder accused who has been in the facility for 19 months made it clear that he doesn’t know of the illegal items that were seized.
“I never see no cell phones, ice picks… Sir, I never see anything,” he said in response to questions posed by Attorney Dexter Todd, who during cross-examination asked the inmate whether he had ever seen sharpened toothbrushes and marijuana as well. He said while he has never seen marijuana in the area to which he was confined, he did smell it.
“I smell but I never see it,” he stated. Previous inmates testified that prisoners would use marijuana and their mobile phones as a means of “comfort” but James held firm that he had not seen the illegal items.

‘COCHORE’
Todd urged the witness to speak up and not be fearful as he would be protected. “You don’t want to be seen as a rat or a ‘cochore’ (informant)?” the attorney asked but received no response.
James described Capital ‘A’ as generally “very peaceful”, noting that there was no fighting there. Recounting what transpired on March 3 before the start of the fire, the prisoner said he was awakened by a fellow inmate who told him they were instructed to pack their things and leave the premises five by five. According to James, he complied, but by the time he arrived to the main entrance, he heard a prison officer identified as “Samuels” say “lock the door”.
At that point the man said the door was locked and he placed his belongings down by the door and returned to his dwelling area. At no time, the prisoner said, were the prisoners being abusive to the prison officers.

“…after I gone to the back, I hear shouting in the yard…they been saying the officers beating prisoners,” he recalled.
Shortly after, he said, inmates began to break the wall that separates Capital ‘A’ from Capital ‘B’ due to the start of a fire. Asked why the wall was broken James said “because dem din (not) opening the door.”

He said the fire that was lit was not huge and it was located in the vicinity of the hole. The prisoner could not state who lit the fire. “I went at the back part of the building…it was not a big fire…they spray some fire extinguisher from Capital ‘B’ through the wall… the fire calm down, then I see sheer smoke. The smoke came from the same direction (of the fire).”
James, like other prisoners, was advised to lay down to avoid the smoke getting into their eyes. He told the Commission that he lay down for approximately one hour.
“Is one big heavy smoke…It come from the corner and go up to the ceiling and come back down…I never see such smoke like what I see there sir…Mattress smoke don’t burn your eyes and skin like that sir,” added James.

Meanwhile, while being cross-examined by attorney for the Guyana Police Force and the Guyana Prison Service, Selwyn Pieters, it was suggested that James was not being truthful about where he was located at the time of the fire.
“I am suggesting to you that if you were in the area that you are suggesting you were, you would have been severely injured or killed,” said Pieters. The attorney’s suggestion to James did not amount to a change in his (James) story as he maintained that he was to the back of the premises receiving fresh air through a vent.

Asked whether he or any of his inmates at any point had suicidal thoughts by Attorney Todd, James said no. “Did you ever witness any plan by the other inmates to kill anybody in Capital ‘A’? You are not aware of any plan by any of the inmates to light themselves afire? Do you have knowledge of any plan to burn Capital ‘A’ by the inmates?” asked Todd. James responded, “No sir.”
The inmate told Todd that Capital ‘A’ has two doors but only one was used. He said while he was at the crease to the back door trying to get air, prisoners were shouting for help, “but nobody didn’t come.”

“When rescue come is when most of the prisoners din (were) already dead,” James recounted. He noted however than another inmate known as Steve Bacchus attempted to rescue the prisoners and had taken a prison officer to the back door. That prison officer James recalled attempted to open the door. He fumbled with several keys but was unsuccessful.
“He had some keys in his hand but he didn’t have the right keys…he tried it…then he left,” the prisoner stated. He noted too that when he first saw the fire he went to a nearby sink to get water but unfortunately there was no running water.

During cross-examination, Pieters asked, “You had an opportunity to escape and you didn’t! Why didn’t you go through the hole to ‘B’ Division? You could have taken steps to defend that fire and you did not? I am going to suggest to you that you contributed to the events that took place in the Georgetown Prison Capital ‘A’ on March 3?”
“Sir me en understand wha yuh said,” the prisoner responded. Pieters changed his line of questioning and asked, “you and your fellow inmates block the door with cork?”
“No sir,” replied James who was then told, “you took no steps to prevent the fire?” He responded, “If I can’t help myself how I helping others?”
Meanwhile, James had also testified that inmates had burned mattresses before in the prison and the smoke from the mattress was far different from the smoke that emanated on March 3.

OBJECTIONS UPHELD
Pieters repeatedly questioned James on the burning of mattresses in the past, but young attorney Darren Wade opposed Pieters’s line of questioning and stated that the witness was being asked one set of questions repeatedly, while noting that answers were previously provided. Those objections were upheld by Justice Patterson.
Like some of the other prisoners who appeared before him, James said another inmate had prepared his statement. That statement was, however, not read to him but he affixed his signature.
“He didn’t read it to me…he come back the next day and tell me fuh sign it and I sign,” said James.
The Commission resumes today and will hear testimony from Owen Belfield.