Decision on attorney’s testimony next week

Coroner Sherman Mc Nicolls will rule next  Friday on whether or not attorney Ravi Rajcoomar will take the witness stand in the Galene Bonadie inquest. He made the announcement yesterday following submissions by attorneys representing both sides in the matter. The attorneys cited reasons for and against Rajcoomar taking the witness stand in the matter. Attorney Theodore Guerra SC, who is seeking the interest of Rajcoomar, who was summoned to give evidence at the inquest into the shooting death of Galene Bonadie yesterday, told the presiding coroner he found “nothing wrong” with what his client had done and there was no reason to summon him to court.

Guerra was referring to statements recorded by Rajcoomar from witnesses in the inquest. According to Guerra, citizens of the country have lost most, if not all confidence in the Police Service of Trinidad and Tobago. “If a person does not feel comfortable going to the police with certain information, and they feel they can go to their attorney, then I don’t see anything wrong with this. Then that brings us to the real question in the matter. Is there really public confidence in the Police Service today?” Guerra submitted. Earlier in the proceedings, Rajcoomar’s actions had been deemed a “wrong move” by attorney Israel Khan SC, who said it was not the responsibility of the attorney to record statements, but rather the job of the police.

Khan, who is representing the four policemen, submitted to Coroner Mc Nicolls that Rajcoomar should excuse himself from the proceedings and in turn, give evidence in the matter since he had “gotten personally involved.” After Khan’s application, Mc Nicolls summoned the attorney to court yesterday to give evidence at the inquest. However Guerra, with the use of legal authorities, told the court there was no reason for his client to take the stand, insisting that it was Rajcoomar’s responsibility to ensure that exchanges between Rajcoomar and his clients remain confidential. “A conversation between any client and his attorney cannot be revealed.

There is nothing wrong with a lawyer taking a statement from a witness in a criminal matter. This is not the first time persons have gone to their lawyers to give statements because they do not trust the police. This is a functioning legal profession and we must be able to defend the public’s interest.” After Guerra’s submission, Khan raised strong objection to Guerra’s “generalisation” of statements, saying Guerra was becoming emotional about the matter. Khan called on Criminal Bar Association head, attorney Desmond Allum SC, who was present in court, seeking the interest of the criminal bar to stop Guerra from “making such statements.

How could he stand here and say that the public has lost confidence in the police?” Khan told the Coroner. Khan maintained his position on the issue, saying Rajcoomar was not acting the role of an attorney when he recorded the statements of nine witnesses in a criminal matter. “He did certain things which an attorney of law ought not to do. “Mr Rajcoomar must come here and protect his integrity and give assistance to the court and explain what is taking place in his chambers.” Hearing resumes next Friday.