SOCU fails to defend court case, Magistrate dismisses charges. Another Trumped up Charge Case Dismissed.

SOCU fails to defend court case, Magistrate dismisses charges


Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman was left with no choice but to dismiss the charges against former Guyana Rice Development Board (GRBD) executives after citing a number of failures by the Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) to defend its case.
The case surrounds allegations of fraud leveled against former General Manager, Jagnarine Singh, and his deputy, Madanlall Ramraj, for failing to enter true entries of over $4.2 M into the company’s ledger, knowing that it was contrary to standard operation procedures.

Freed: Former GRDB manager, Jagnarine Singh and his deputy, Madanlall Ramraj.

The incidents are said to have occurred between 2011 and 2012, at the company’s Lot 16-17 Cowan Street, Kingston head office.
The duo was facing 16 charges in relation to the matter. Their case which was ongoing before Magistrate Latchman was scheduled for peremptory hearing at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court yesterday.
The hearing was scheduled for the continuation of evidence by prosecution witness, Keshwanand Seetaram, for whom an arrest warrant was issued. Seetaram was however not present when the matter was called yesterday.
Special Prosecutors, Hewley Griffith and Lawrence Harris, indicated to the court that they had no other witnesses available and requested adjournment to facilitate the testimony of Special Superintendent of Police attached to SOCU, Sheronie James. James was also not present yesterday.
Given the obvious unpreparedness of SOCU to proceed with the trial, Attorney for the former GRBD officials, Glenn Hanoman, made an application for the prosecution to close their case.
He pointed out that it looks as if SOCU did not know what they were doing.
“They have provided this court with a lot of excuses, piecemeal evidence and have been wasting the court’s time.”
“They claim that Ms James was not available on number of occasions before and I believe the Court has exercised enough patience with this matter. It is time that the prosecution closes its case,” Hanoman said.
SOCU attorney Griffith then told the Court that he was unaware of a number of developments in the case.
“I would prefer to get further directions from the Director of Public Prosecution, (DPP) before making the determination, Your Worship,” Griffith said.
However, Magistrate Latchman told the Attorney that the court has exhausted enough time and resources, waiting on SOCU officers to defend its case.
“This court has wasted enough time waiting on Ms James. Prosecutor, I am ordering you to close your case,” Latchman said.
Griffith hesitated in the face of the Magistrate’s order but he eventually relented.
And since the prosecution had no other witnesses to lead evidence in the matter, Attorney Hanoman presented a no case submission on behalf of the two men.
In the no case submission, Hanoman essentially argued that his clients were not the ones responsible for making accounting records; that no evidence was led in court to establish that the law requires accounting records to be kept only in a general ledger and that the prosecution produced no such document for verification by the Court.
In response, Attorney Hewley Griffith noted that the prosecution has established that the two men’s signatures were on the accounts and that they breached the operating procedures, which formed a basis of the evidence against them.
After considering the submissions of both lawyers, Magistrate ruled in favour of the no- case submission. She dismissed the 16 charges against the two men.
“I have determined that a prima facie case has not been made out against you …In circumstances all the charges against you have been dismissed and you are free to go,” Latchman told the former GRDB managers yesterday.

Original Post
yuji22 posted:

SOCU fails to defend court case, Magistrate dismisses charges

Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman was left with no choice but to dismiss the charges against former Guyana Rice Development Board (GRBD) executives after citing a number of failures by the Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) to defend its case.
The case surrounds allegations of fraud leveled against former General Manager, Jagnarine Singh, and his deputy, Madanlall Ramraj, for failing to enter true entries of over $4.2 M into the company’s ledger, knowing that it was contrary to standard operation procedures.

Freed: Former GRDB manager, Jagnarine Singh and his deputy, Madanlall Ramraj.


“I would prefer to get further directions from the Director of Public Prosecution, (DPP) before making the determination, Your Worship,” Griffith said.
However, Magistrate Latchman told the Attorney that the court has exhausted enough time and resources, waiting on SOCU officers to defend its case.
“This court has wasted enough time waiting on Ms James. Prosecutor, I am ordering you to close your case,” Latchman said.
Griffith hesitated in the face of the Magistrate’s order but he eventually relented.

Looks like SOCU is on a far lower level than a PACU.

Like you blind to see what he said about me ?  I just responded in kind.Cain started the nastiest attack. He is notorious for personal attacks and expect posters to just roll over.

He should be able to take it back when he  visciuosly dishes it out. 

I don’t understand what all the fuss about. SOCU is a prosecuting agency.  They investigate and bring charges according to their assessment.  The defense argues the other side countering the charges.  The court decides who made their case.  

This process should be welcomed as it clarifies any doubt.

No problem but it is being used as a victimization tool to harass and intimidate Opposition members. How about a few of the PNC daylight theft being investigated ?

I have zero problem in taking anyone to court who steals state assets but this administritarion is using the agency as an instrument of harassing their opponents. The courts are throwing the book at them for presenting these baseless cases and a lack of evidence as ruled by the judge in this case.

SOCU has an obligation to act with due deligence and not present these baseless cases and acting wrecklessly.

It undermines the intent,integrity, and purpose of the organization. Read what the Judge stated in throwing out this case.

The victims should not hesitate to sue.

Baseman posted:

I don’t understand what all the fuss about. SOCU is a prosecuting agency.  They investigate and bring charges according to their assessment.  The defense argues the other side countering the charges.  The court decides who made their case.  

This process should be welcomed as it clarifies any doubt.

exactly...

yuji22 posted:

No problem but it is being used as a victimization tool to harass and intimidate Opposition members.

The victims should not hesitate to sue.

You need to educate yourself on the subject of suing government,you claimed to have top Lawyers have a discussion with them,may learn a thing or two.

yuji22 posted:

Bai ress yourself. You and Mitwah are two cry babies at GNI. Y’all behave like anti men when posters fire back. 

Cry babies !!!  Admins can attest.

Fire back !! alyuh coming up empty.

What's up with the gay slang,does it make your post more pronounce or is it because alyuh leader is alleged homo ? the usage acceptable.

Ray posted:
Baseman posted:

I don’t understand what all the fuss about. SOCU is a prosecuting agency.  They investigate and bring charges according to their assessment.  The defense argues the other side countering the charges.  The court decides who made their case.  

This process should be welcomed as it clarifies any doubt.

exactly...

Nonsense, they only targeting PPP supporters. When will they target the pnc crooks that have been stealing in the past 3 years? Need I mention names or you pnc boys have short memory?

yuji22 posted:

Bai ress yourself. You and Mitwah are two cry babies at GNI. Y’all behave like anti men when posters fire back. 

Today is coming out day. Like Yugly came out today and looking for a date. Yugly gyurl, I man don't swing your way. 

SOCU may appeal dismissal of charges against ex-GRDB manager, consultant

October 12 2018

Source

While declining to discuss the circumstances that led to the recent dismissal of the fraud case against two former Guyana Rice Development Board (GRDB) members, Special Prosecutor Lawrence Harris yesterday hinted at the possibility of an appeal being filed by the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU).

Speaking to Stabroek News at his South Road office, the attorney said that in the coming days he and the lead prosecutor, attorney Hewley Griffith, will be meeting with officials of SOCU to decide on the way forward.

Former GRDB General Manager Jagnarine Singh and agricultural consultant Madanlall Ramraj were on Tuesday freed of 16 charges of fraud, which were dismissed by Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman, who found that no case was made out against them.

There were a total of 34 charges brought against the duo by the Unit and they were being tried for 16 of them by Magistrate Latchman.

The matters before Magistrate Latchman alleged that the two men fraudulently took, or applied to their own use and benefit or for any other purpose other than the use of the GRDB, over $9 million, between January 8th, 2010 and January 17th, 2017, at Lots 116 to 117 Cowan Street, Kingston.

During Tuesday’s hearing, the prosecution failed to provide witnesses, including Superintendent of Police attached to SOCU Sheronie James, who was testifying in another SOCU matter in the courtroom of the Chief Magistrate.

As a result, the SOCU prosecutor requested a further date to have their witnesses present. However, objections were raised by attorney Glenn Hanoman, who represented the two men. As Tuesday was the prosecution’s final date to produce witnesses, the magistrate ordered that the prosecution close its case.

Submissions were later made by both the prosecutor and the defence attorney. Magistrate Latchman subsequently ruled that a prima facie case was not established against the duo and dismissed the matters against them.

Asked whether he is satisfied that he and Griffith did all they could to see the matter to finality, Harris responded, “I would think so,” They were appointed as the special prosecutions for the case from the time the charges were filed.

Sources close to the matter, however, are of the firm belief that the two attorneys ought to take the blame for the way the case ended.

One source, while making it clear that the two attorneys are answerable to the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and not SOCU, pointed out that the case was set for last Tuesday and instead of attending they opted to participate in a training exercise for prosecutors and investigators which was organised by Dr. Sam Sittlington, a financial crime expert who is currently an advisor to SOCU.

“Last Tuesday was a court date and the special prosecutors should have attended; they did not, they went to the training …they didn’t go to court [and] I don’t know why,” the source pointed out.

Although the matter was indeed scheduled to be heard, only the defendents showed up. A one week adjournment date was given. It would appear that the understanding was that persons would be ready to take to the witness box to give testimony at the next hearing.

According to the source, the available information suggests that the special prosecutors did not inform witnesses who had to continue their testimony as well as new ones that they were required to be at court.

Sources made it clear that SOCU was only responsible for investigating the matter which led to charges against the duo. Once the matter was filed in court, it became the responsibility of the special prosecutors and the persons they reported to.

This newspaper was told that there were about 100 witnesses lined up to testify in the case.

Last June, several GRDB board members were charged with failing to record entries for funds amounting to over $250 million in total in the agency’s general ledger, from 2011 to 2015. Singh was also charged in that case.  The other persons charged  were Prema Roopnarine, former Deputy Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Agriculture; Ricky Ramraj, agricultural consultant; Badrie Persaud, business consultant; Dharamkumar Seeraj, the General Secretary of the Rice Producers Association and a PPP/C MP; and Nigel Dharamlall, also a PPP/C MP.

An arrest warrant was issued by the court for Peter Ramcharran who is in Canada. Ramcharran is currently fighting extradition back to Guyana to face charges.

Django posted:

SOCU may appeal dismissal of charges against ex-GRDB manager, consultant

October 12 2018

Source

While declining to discuss the circumstances that led to the recent dismissal of the fraud case against two former Guyana Rice Development Board (GRDB) members, Special Prosecutor Lawrence Harris yesterday hinted at the possibility of an appeal being filed by the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU).

Speaking to Stabroek News at his South Road office, the attorney said that in the coming days he and the lead prosecutor, attorney Hewley Griffith, will be meeting with officials of SOCU to decide on the way forward.

Former GRDB General Manager Jagnarine Singh and agricultural consultant Madanlall Ramraj were on Tuesday freed of 16 charges of fraud, which were dismissed by Principal Magistrate Judy Latchman, who found that no case was made out against them.

There were a total of 34 charges brought against the duo by the Unit and they were being tried for 16 of them by Magistrate Latchman.

The matters before Magistrate Latchman alleged that the two men fraudulently took, or applied to their own use and benefit or for any other purpose other than the use of the GRDB, over $9 million, between January 8th, 2010 and January 17th, 2017, at Lots 116 to 117 Cowan Street, Kingston.

During Tuesday’s hearing, the prosecution failed to provide witnesses, including Superintendent of Police attached to SOCU Sheronie James, who was testifying in another SOCU matter in the courtroom of the Chief Magistrate.

As a result, the SOCU prosecutor requested a further date to have their witnesses present. However, objections were raised by attorney Glenn Hanoman, who represented the two men. As Tuesday was the prosecution’s final date to produce witnesses, the magistrate ordered that the prosecution close its case.

Submissions were later made by both the prosecutor and the defence attorney. Magistrate Latchman subsequently ruled that a prima facie case was not established against the duo and dismissed the matters against them.

Asked whether he is satisfied that he and Griffith did all they could to see the matter to finality, Harris responded, “I would think so,” They were appointed as the special prosecutions for the case from the time the charges were filed.

Sources close to the matter, however, are of the firm belief that the two attorneys ought to take the blame for the way the case ended.

One source, while making it clear that the two attorneys are answerable to the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and not SOCU, pointed out that the case was set for last Tuesday and instead of attending they opted to participate in a training exercise for prosecutors and investigators which was organised by Dr. Sam Sittlington, a financial crime expert who is currently an advisor to SOCU.

“Last Tuesday was a court date and the special prosecutors should have attended; they did not, they went to the training …they didn’t go to court [and] I don’t know why,” the source pointed out.

Although the matter was indeed scheduled to be heard, only the defendents showed up. A one week adjournment date was given. It would appear that the understanding was that persons would be ready to take to the witness box to give testimony at the next hearing.

According to the source, the available information suggests that the special prosecutors did not inform witnesses who had to continue their testimony as well as new ones that they were required to be at court.

Sources made it clear that SOCU was only responsible for investigating the matter which led to charges against the duo. Once the matter was filed in court, it became the responsibility of the special prosecutors and the persons they reported to.

This newspaper was told that there were about 100 witnesses lined up to testify in the case.

Last June, several GRDB board members were charged with failing to record entries for funds amounting to over $250 million in total in the agency’s general ledger, from 2011 to 2015. Singh was also charged in that case.  The other persons charged  were Prema Roopnarine, former Deputy Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Agriculture; Ricky Ramraj, agricultural consultant; Badrie Persaud, business consultant; Dharamkumar Seeraj, the General Secretary of the Rice Producers Association and a PPP/C MP; and Nigel Dharamlall, also a PPP/C MP.

An arrest warrant was issued by the court for Peter Ramcharran who is in Canada. Ramcharran is currently fighting extradition back to Guyana to face charges.

They want to justify their existence...collecting free money at the taxpayers' expense.

Add Reply

Likes (0)

×
×
×
×
×