Dear Ms Ali-Hack

I, Elton McRae, a citizen of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, hereby request the reopening of
investigations into the actions of Cadet Officer Franz Paul in April, 2014, when it was alleged that he
played Russian roulette and in the process caused Alex Griffith to be shot in the mouth.
I have read in the press on several occasions of allegations of torture exercised by members of the
Guyana Police Force. Many of these press reports have had accompanying graphic images to show
the tell-tale results of the assumed allegations, yet there seems to be a difficulty to establish that
crimes of torture were perpetrated and the accused charged for torture.
The continuance of the inability by our law-enforcement agencies to determine what constitutes torture, especially when perpetrated by members of the GPF, causes me to be fearful that my constitutional rights of protection by the state are not guaranteed and I can be tortured by a police Officer and s/he’ll not be so charged.
Torture is a defined crime within the Laws of Guyana, a nation signatory to the UN Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Yet the agencies
that are charged with its determination have in recent times appeared to abrogate their responsibilities before the citizens of Guyana. I submit that the Director of Public Prosecutions make representation for further investigations into the incident in which Cadet Officer Franz Paul allegedly wounded Alex Griffith. These investigations should be in the first instance to determine whether or not the evidence describing the action of the cadet officer is enough to charge him for torturing Alex Griffith, and secondly, if the evidence describing his action is adequate to lay charges of attempted murder for the same incident.
I and other citizens are fearful of a repeat of that story surrounding Cadet Paul, a classic case of
police excesses. It is clear that Cadet Officer Paul broke a series of standard codes and procedures that
the investigation has to date glossed over, these include:
• He was stationed on the East Coast of Demerara, yet he was the most senior police
respondent to a crime committed in Georgetown
• As a close relative of the victim (his sister) of the alleged crime, Cadet Paul should not have
been involved in the investigation
• After he had ordered the arrest of Alex Griffith, he took him to a place for interrogation which is
not defined as fit and proper for such activities.
It is instructive to note that he did not handcuff the minor
• He is known to have drawn his firearm during the interrogation of the child, at a point in
time when there was no need.
• He took out all but one bullet from his weapon, placed it in the child’s mouth and proceeded
to play Russian roulette as he sought information.
• He caused the gun to discharge in the mouth of the arrested child, after he squeezed the
trigger the second time.
Yet after three years, there has been no statement from The Ministry of Legal Affairs, The Ministry of
Home Affairs (now Public Security), The GPF nor The Police Service Commission indicating that Paul’s
action was that of a rogue cop.
In all of this, one has to always keep in mind that as a cadet officer, he has been identified for
leadership roles within the Guyana Police Force. Thus to allow such blatant slippage as has been
witnessed around the interaction between Paul and Griffith is either an indication that the GPF no
longer adheres to these core codes and practices, or that the future relationship between the GPF
and citizens would constitute inappropriate actions.
It is clear that the intent of Paul pulling up by the roadside to interrogate Griffith was predicated
with torture in mind. The youthful Griffith hardly presented a danger to Paul or the other policemen
on the scene. Yet Paul on disembarking from the vehicle drew his service revolver, removed all the
bullets save one, placed the barrel of the gun in Griffith‘s mouth and proceeded to question Griffith.
To the onlooker what is clear, is that a person wearing the uniform of a state entity was using an
inappropriate method to garner information. His method constituted torture for he would have
caused the questioned person to experience what can be described as severe mental pain/fear in his
attempt to get information or a confession.
Furthermore, the fact that the weapon was made to discharge in Griffith’s mouth by Paul places him
in a position of actually creating a threat to the life of Griffith. Under the law, he should also be
charged with attempted murder, since all his actions until the moment the weapon discharged were
wilful and he knew that there was the possibility that the weapon could be discharge because of what he
was doing.
The charges as they relate to his non-compliance with standard police procedures, I hope the GPF, and
The Police Service Commission find it decent to institute.
The fact that the GPF found it fitting to recommend that Paul be charged for ‘discharging a loaded
Firearm and causing grievous bodily harm’, to many is simply a pat on the wrist and creating a way
for his continuance within the Police Force.
Regards
Elton McRae