Dhanraj used hitmen to kill Sumairsingh

A JURY of eight men and four women were warned yesterday that whether they agreed with Dhanraj Singh politically, it must not influence their verdict which they will be called upon to give in the trial of the former Local Government Minister for murder.

The jurors began hearing evidence yesterday after Justice Melville Baird delivered a ruling and called upon British Queen Counsel, Sir Timothy Cassel, to open the case on behalf of the State in the San Fernando First Assize Court. Cassel began by telling the jury that the charge against Singh for the murder of Hansraj Sumairsingh, was a contract killing. Referring to Singh as a former minister of Local Government and Sumairsingh as chairman of the Rio Claro/Mayaro Regional Corporation, Cassel told the jury that Singh did not kill Sumairsingh with his own hands. He used hitmen, whom Cassel said, Singh paid to carry out the killing. Singh wearing a two-piece suit sat in the dock and looked serious as the British Queen’s Counsel held the jurors and judge in rapt attention during his opening of the case.

Cassel said that the evidence against Singh will be presented to the court from the mouth of a man name Elliot Hypolite also called Abdullah. He was one of the men who carried out the murder, and Cassel explained to the jury that the law was such that if someone paid a person to kill another, that person was guilty of murder as if he fired the gun. Cassel, reading from an eight-page opening speech, told the jury that Hypolite received immunity from being prosecuted for the murder. He told the court a condition of granting the immunity was that Hypolite would testify and give truthful evidence. “One of the problems faced by those concerned with law enforcement when faced with a contract killing, is that usually the only person who can implicate the person who ordered and arranged it, are the killers themselves — the hitmen,” Cassel told the jury.

The lead State prosecutor added: “And unless they are prepared to co-operate with the police and the authorities, there will be no evidence against the person who has ordered and paid for the murder.” The jury, including one alternate, heard from Cassel how Sumairsingh was murdered. Sumairsingh, he said, owned a beach house at Gran Lagoon, Mayaro. His wife, Sandra, his son Visham and daughter Kavita, went to the beach house around 3 pm December, 31, 1999, and found Sumairsingh lying in a room dead.

Cassel said that the State’s case is that Sumairsingh was shot by a man called Stephen Cummings also called “Chen”. Hypolite would be called to testify, Cassel told the jury, firstly about how he met accused Singh. They met in 1999 while Hypolite was installing burglar proofing at Singh’s local government office in Tunupuna. “Accord-ing to Hypolite, there was a friendly conversation between the two. It was either at the first meeting, or very shortly after, the defendant (Singh) said he wanted Hypolite to deal with a man,” Cassel said. Hypolite will testify that he next met Singh at the opening ceremony of the Rum Bond, Eastern Main Road, later that year. Hypolite had been invited to the function by the Programme Manager of the URP. At the function, Cassel said, Hypolite will testify that he noticed Singh speaking to “Chen”. “And Singh called Hypolite and asked him in the presence of Chen, whether he was ready to do the job,” Cassel told the jury. Hypolite asked what the job was and Cassel told the jury that Singh answered: “I want Hansraj dead”.

The jury heard from Cassel’s opening statement that Singh told Hypolite to come to his house for the money. The Prosecutor went on to tell the jury that on December 8, Sumairsingh was heard by two people, his driver and the County Supt, while  speaking on the phone. They will testify that at the time, Sumairsingh was angry and agitated. Cassel said that after that telephone conversation, Sumairsingh’s ordered his secretary to type a letter. That letter was faxed to the Prime Minister, Cassel told the jury. Cassel told the jury that Sumairsingh then complained to the police that he had been threatened.

The Prosecutor then said that Hypolite will testify that in mid-December he went to Singh’s home. There, Hypolite was briefed by Singh about where Sumairsingh lived and Cassel said, Hypolite was paid $2,000. Cassel then told the jury that Singh then showed and gave Hypolite “some guns”. Cassel said that Hypolite subsequently went to Sumairsingh’s home on a reconnaissance expedition. And it was after Christmas in 1999, Cassel said, that Hypolite, Chen and another man, drove pass Sumair-singh’s home in a red Mazda 323. “They had the guns with them,” Cassel said. The jury heard that “Chen” spoke to Kavita. Kavita would be called to testify that she was at home around 6 pm when she saw the car pass the house slowly. Cassel said that Sumairsingh arrived home with his wife that evening and as he got out the car, “Chen” called out to the deceased. But Sumairsingh hurried back into the house. It was obvious, Cassel said, that “Chen” wanted to kill Sumairsingh that day. But Sumairsingh, Cassel added, gave them no opportunity by hurrying into the house.

Having failed, Hypolite and “Chen” left, the Prosecutor told the jury. Cassel went on to tell the jury that Singh was not pleased that the killing had not taken place. Hypolite will testify, Cassel said, that Singh said he would arrange to meet Sumairsingh at a beach house in Eccles Road, Mayaro. Singh went on to describe the house to Hypolite, Cassel told the jury. Continuing his address to the jury, Cassel said that on December 30, Sumairsingh packed his bags and left for the beach house. “That was the last time his family saw him alive,” Cassel said. Cassel outlined to the jury how Sumairsingh was killed. Hypolite will testify that his companion drove past the house on December 31, around 6:30 pm. Eventually two of them entered the house and “Chen”, Cassel said, gave Hypolite a 9 mm pistol. Hypolite will testify that he saw “Chen” raise the gun and point it through the doorway. “He then heard two bangs. One after the other,” Cassel said.

He told the jury that Hypolite saw a cell phone and picked it up. As they left the house, Cassel said, they were seen running to their car by an eye witness, Asia Watson, around 8 pm. Cassel said that Hypolite will testify that they stopped on the Ortoire Mayaro bridge and threw the gun and cell phone into the river. “However, it turned out that the cell phone did not go into the river. It landed on a boat,” Cassel said. The cell phone, Cassel said, was found by fisherman, Terry Chaitan. The Prosecutor told the jury that a few days later Hypolite met Singh at NIPDEC house. “They discussed the money. The defendant said that he would pay them after things had cooled down,” Cassel said. Cassel told the jury that in March 2000, Hypolite left the country and returned in October. He was still not paid for his part in the murder of Sumairsingh, the Prosecutor told the jury. But subsequently, Cassel said, Hypolite was paid $5,000. He said that Singh arranged with Hypolite to pay him $60,000 but when the witness went to the location as agreed, Singh did not show up. “So that all Hypolite got out of this was the original $2,000 and the later $5,000, making it $7,000 in all. He was later arrested and charged for this murder, but was granted immunity in return for his evidence,” Cassel said.

He told the jury that police searched Singh’s house and found a 9 mm magazine. Singh, he added, was a licenced firearm holder but Cassel told the jury that the gun and ammunition given to Hypolite were of 9 mm calibre. Cassel said that Singh was arrested and questioned by police. But Cassel told the jury not to criticise Singh for refusing to answer questions to police investigators. It was his right. Cassel told the jury that they have all taken a solemn oath to  judge the case only according to the evidence. Urging the jurors to pay attention only to evidence, Cassel told them that any allegation against a former government minister has to be taken seriously by everyone concerned. “When the allegation is one of murder, it is hard to imagine anything more serious,” Cassel added.

He, however, told them that special consideration cannot be given to Singh because he was a government minister. “He must be judged exactly the same way as any other defendant in any other case,” Cassel told the jurors.  He told the jury that he need not tell them that whether they agree with Singh politically or not, it was wholly irrelevant to whatever verdict they may arrive at. Three witnesses testified yesterday. The trial continues this morning.