Seeromanie, Ramasir to stand trial for murder

DESCRIBING the case as “borderline,” acting Deputy Chief Magistrate Mark Wellington committed Seeromanie Maharaj-Naraynsingh and businessman Elton Ramasir to stand trial in the High Court for the 1994 murder of Dr Chandra Naraynsingh. Wellington said although the evidence was of a “tenuous nature,” it was not the function of the Magistrates’ Court to “decide” on the evidence.

Seeromanie nodded as Wellington gave his ruling in the San Fernando Magistrates’ Court yesterday, but co-accused Ramasir looked depressed and stared stoned-faced. As she was led out of the courtroom in handcuffs by two female police officers, Seeromanie muttered: “Justice will be served.” Seated on a bench in the public gallery was Seeromanie’s husband, Prof Vijay Naraynsingh, who bent his head downwards and looked solemnly at Seeromanie. The silence in the courtroom was broken by the sobs of Anamika, daughter of the professor and the deceased Dr Chandra who was gunned down ten years ago at the Langmore Health Centre where she worked. Two weeks ago husband Naraynsingh was discharged by Magistrate Wellington who said that Naraynsingh had no case to answer.

Friends of Seeromanie from the Hindu Prachar Kendra in Central Trinidad, where the accused was a regular devotee, wept in and outside the court after the ruling was handed down. Before she was led away in handcuffs by two female police officers, Prof Naraynsingh was able to speak briefly to Seeromanie. Seeromanie, who married Vijay 19 months ago, was barely able to answer as police officers whisked her out of the courtroom. She is his third wife. Wellington ordered Seeromanie  to stand trial at the next sitting of the Assizes, for the murder of Dr Chandra, who was gunned down on June 29, 1994.

Shawn Parris, one of the State’s two main witnesses who testified in the murder inquiry, was last year imprisoned for life without parole for 30 years after he pleaded guilty to killing Dr Chandra. Parris is appealing the severity of the sentence and his case came up for hearing last week in the Appeal Court. When he discharged Naraynsingh on March 4, Wellington had ruled that a prima facie case was made out against Seeromanie and Ramasir. For the past week, the magistrate had to consider the evidence of Divisional Fire Officer Curwin Callender brought by the defence, about a burnt businessplace on Cipero Street as it related to the evidence given by Parris. There was also the rebuttal evidence led by prosecuting attorney Roger Gaspard from the person of CID’s PC Curt Simon. 

When Magistrate Wellington was scheduled to give his decision last week Friday, however, he did not turn up and Seeromanie and Ramasir were remanded in custody until yesterday. Before delivering his decision yesterday, the magistrate apologised for his absence, saying that the case required more careful consideration than he had realised. “I must thank all parties present for their patience displayed. It has been a marathon,” Wellington said. In giving his ruling yesterday, Wellington said: “On the totality of evidence which was led by the prosecution and the option of the defence to call witnesses; on evidence in total, the court has had a difficult time in making this decision. It has really been a see-saw battle, a tug-of-war.”

The magistrate added, however, that even though the evidence was of a “tenuous nature,” the Magistrates’ Court was not the place to deal with such issues. Wellington said: “I am of the opinion that against the accused, a prima facie case has been made out. Even though the evidence is of a somewhat tenuous nature, it is not for this court to assess the evidence.” Wellington lauded attorneys on both sides for their legal arguments during the case, saying that both parties “represented their interests with a passion.” However, minutes after the ruling, Seeromanie’s attorney Prakash Ramadhar told Wellington about an allegation that police officers had attempted to bribe a woman to give evidence against accused Ramasir and freed Naraynsingh.

“I have received an affidavit from a person which I will pass to the DPP, Commissioner of Police, Ministry of National Security, Attorney General and the Prime Minister,” Ramadhar told the magistrate. The attorney added, “It shows that persons purporting to be police officers went to this person’s home during the inquiry with an attempt to give this person money or a promise if this person came to court and said Dr Naraynsingh and Ramasir came to her home and picked up a person by the name of “Rev.” It is my duty to bring this to the court’s attention and find out if they are indeed police officers, and have an investigation into the matter.” Ramasir’s attorney Larry Lalla requested that the court’s notes of evidence be prepared as soon as possible for preparation for the case in the High Court. “I am not asking for any favours here,” Lalla told the magistrate.
 
For the case to be taken to trial in the High Court, the notes of evidence from the Magistrates’ Court must first be typed and taken to the DPP’s office for vetting. Documents indicting Seeromanie and Ramasir for the murder of Dr Chandra will be formally drawn up and filed in the registry of the High Court. The case will then be listed on the Cause List of the Ciminal Assizes. A High Court judge will then fix a date for the trial to begin. Dr Vijay Naraynsingh said yesterday that he was not shocked that his wife had been committed to stand trial. He said that the magistrate did what he thought was fair and that he had no problem with that. He described it as God’s will. Ramasir’s common law wife, Chan Sooklal, wept outside the court house after Wellington’s decision.