Defence challenges admissibility of document in orphan murder PI
Stabroek News
June 18, 2003
The lawyer representing Nazir Hamid and Yusuf Rahaman, the two men accused of murdering 14-year-old orphan Raheem Abdool, yesterday challenged the admissibility of a document which the state sought to have tendered as evidence when the Preliminary Inquiry into the charge against the men continued.
An adjournment was granted and the hearing is to continue next Friday morning.
Detective Constable 18295 Anantram Jagnandan took the witness stand yesterday when the hearing continued before Senior Magistrate Melissa Robertson-Ogle, but was unable to tender the document, upon an objection by defence attorney, Vic Puran.
Puran objected to the admissibility of the document, which he described as documentary hearsay, founding his argument on the basis of the document not being within the definition of the Evidence Act.
While initially countering his argument, State Counsel Paula Gilford, who is appearing with attorney Simone Bullen, acquiesced when Puran questioned if the prosecution was prepared to say whether or not the document contained an error. He said that once an error is a fact of record, extrinsic evidence cannot be used to correct the error, rather only the maker of the document could do so.
At this, Gilford said it is the intention of the prosecution to summon the maker of the document, while Bullen later submitted to the magistrate that although another witness was present, the questions asked of him would be in relation to the document. Hamid, the former acting CEO of the Shaheed (Sad’r) Boys Orphanage and his employee Rahaman, called `Kenneth,’ are jointly charged for the murder of Abdool, who resided in the institution until his death.
