Court hears of Sumairsingh’s letter to Panday

FOUR DAYS before he was killed at his Mayaro beach house, the wife and daughter of chairman of the Rio Claro/Mayaro Regional Corporation, Hansraj Sumairsingh, saw a strange red car parked in front their home at Tabaquite Road, Rio Claro.

Yesterday, Sumairsingh’s daughter, Kavita, testified in the San Fernando First Assize Court how a tall man who emerged from the red car, spoke to her on December 27, 1999. The trial, in which former Local Government Minister Dhanraj Singh is charged with the murder of Sumairsingh, also heard evidence from witnesses of a telephone call Sumairsingh made at the corporation’s office days before he was killed, in which he appeared visibly upset and angry. The court also heard yesterday about a letter the chairman subsequently wrote to the then Prime Minister in 1999, and a complaint he made to the police. The evidence was given by seven witnesses who the state called yesterday in the continuing trial of Singh for the murder of Sumairsingh between December 31, 1999 and January 1, 2000. Trial judge is Justice Melville Baird.

 British Queen’s Counsel, Sir Timothy Cassel, called Sandra Sumairsingh yesterday and she testified that on December 27, 1999, she and Sumairsingh (husband) returned to their home around 8:30 pm from her sister’s residence. It was while walking up the stairs, Sandra said, she noticed a red car stopped in front their home. It stopped for about a minute then drove off in a southerly direction. She said she continued walking into the house and so did Sumairsingh. Cassel, leading the prosecution team, allowed Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, Devand Rampersad, to question Sandra who told the jury of seeing her husband dead at his beach house four days after they saw the car. Sandra testified that on December 30, 1999, Sumairsingh packed meat and alcohol in a cooler and left in his 929 Mazda motor car for his beach house. Around 9 pm that night, she telephoned Singh on his cell phone but Sandra testified she got no answer. The cell phone was shown to the witness in court and she identified it as belonging to her husband.

 Sandra told the court that on the following day she called again but got no answer. The woman testified that she and her stepson Visham decided to go to the beach house. The widow broke down in tears when she told the court of “peeping” through ventilation bricks and seeing her husband’s feet. She said she rushed inside the house and saw Sumairsingh in a pool of blood in the living room. The woman was offered a glass of water and wiped away tears with a tissue as she continued her testimony. Sandra was cross-examined by one of the attorneys defending Singh, Prakash Ramadhar, who asked her if Sumairsingh used to discuss “problems” with her. She answered in the affirmative and was asked by Ramadhar if the name Lancelot Ottley ever  came up in their discussions, Sandra said yes. The jury heard that Ottley was manager of the URP project in the Rio Claro/Mayaro district. Sandra told the court that she knew Ottley while she herself worked with the URP.

Kavita Sumairsingh testified that on December 27, she was sitting in the gallery of their home when she noticed a red 323 Mazda passby slowly. “Two minutes it returned and parked in front our house. A tall man of African descent, neatly dressed, spoke to me. He stood in the gateway. The conversation lasted a minute and a half. He went back in the car and left,” Kavita said. The woman who said she was the daughter of Sumairsingh, told the jury that the car returned that night about 9 pm. In answer to Rampersad, the witness said the glass was heavily tinted and she did not see anyone in the car. Kavita told the jury that when her father returned home that night the car was parked in front the house. She said she spoke to him (Sumairsingh) and he looked through the window. The woman then gave evidence of her father leaving their home for the beach on December 30, and finding him dead there the next day. The State called David Gene who was the chief executive officer of the Mayaro/Rio Claro Regional Corporation. He testified that he bought three cell phones on behalf of the corporation, one of which was for Sumairsingh.

The witness was shown the cell phone and after checking its serial number in the witness box, positively identified it. The state is alleging that Elliot Hypolite who was part of the killing, picked up Sumairsingh’s cell phone at the beach home that fateful night and threw it over the Ortoire/Mayaro bridge. It landed in a boat, according to the state’s case. Gene was the subject of lengthy cross-examination by Ramadhar who asked him if he knew Ottley. Asked if Ottley was a muslim and manager of the URP (Rio Claro), Gene said yes. The CEO was questioned by the attorney about contracts awarded by the corporation as well as material that was believed to have been stolen by the URP to construct a beach house in Mayaro. Gene was re-crossexamined by Cassel about a letter Sumairsingh wrote to the Prime Minister concerning Singh (Dhanraj). The CEO said he knew about the letter.

Mootilal Moonoo, Sumairsingh’s driver, was next called by the state and questioned by Cassel. The witness was privy to a telephone conversation in the chairman’s office. That was on December 8, 1999, Moonoo said. “I did not hear the conversation but I heard him speaking in a raised voice. He (Sumairsingh) looked kind of vex and serious,” Moonoo said. Moonoo said that later that day after Sumairsingh had summoned his secretary to his office following the telephone conversation, he (Moonoo) went to the Rio Claro Police Station. The driver said that he then accompanied Sgt George to Sumairsingh’s office and the policeman took away several “papers”. This witness was reserved in order for lead counsel for the defence, Karl Hudson-Phillips QC, to cross-examine if need be. Hudson-Phillips is due to return on Friday from the Hague where he was sworn in as a judge of the International Criminal Court. Hubert Ramnarine, the County Superintendent, next took the witness box and testified that around 1:30 pm on December 8, 1999, he was in Sumairsingh’s office when he heard the chairman speaking loudly on the telephone. “He was rather upset. I was there up to the end. Sumairsingh took the receiver and slammed it down in an angry and vexing way on the base of the phone,” Roopnarine said. This witness was also reserved for cross-examnination by Hudson-Phillips.

The state called Sumairsingh’s secretary, Gyaitri Geeta Roopnarine Bhahadoor. She testified that on December 8, 1999, the chairman asked her to type a letter. “He gave me a draft which I then typed,” Bhahadoor said. Asked by Cassel if the letter indicated that Sumairsingh’s personal safety was at risk, the secretary replied: “Yes”. She also answered in the affirmative when asked if in the letter, Sumairsingh stated that “he would have to walk with his own security”.  The last witness called by the state yesterday was retired policeman, Rudolph James. He said that on January 1, 2000, a fisherman called Terry Chaitan who was his friend, gave him a cell phone. The trial will continue this morning when the state will call more witnesses. (See Page 4)