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.

POLICE are investigating the reported shooting of labourer Hugh Beatrice, who was shot twice around 8.15 pm Sunday. No motive has as yet been established but lawmen said they are working along certain lines.

Reports are that Beatrice, 48, was at his Quarry Street, Mt Pleasant, Arima, home when a lone gunman came up to him and shot him on the right thigh and left leg. Police said Beatrice was rushed to the Port-of-Spain General Hospital, where he is listed in stable condition.  Acting Cpl Maraj and PC Gyan of the Arima Criminal Investigations Department (CID) visited the scene and conducted investigations. The former is continuing investigations.

Northern Division police are also investigating a report that around 5 am yesterday, PCs Bernard, Callender and others of the Arouca CID executed a search warrant at the Bon Air (West) home of a family. The officers found and seized a .357 Magnum revolver and three live rounds of .38 special ammunition. The officers then arrested a man and his wife and a family member, who reside at Beetham Estate. The three were charged with illegal possession of a firearm and ammunition and were expected to put in a court appearance yesterday. Police also said that the firearm will be traced to determine if it was used in any illegal activities.

AMONG THE many developments following the offer of VSEP to Caroni workers is the matter of “land blocking” in the Glenroy fields, Garth Road, Princes Town.

Several persons have been building small houses with coconut trees to show that they have been occupying the lands, and last Sunday many of them were seen planting vegetables and drilling holes on the lands. The lands were abandoned by Caroni after the 2001 harvest after being deemed ‘non-profitable’. They had been left vacant and were overgrown with bushes until some individuals began clearing the lands and putting their marks in an effort to show they have been occupying the lots. According to Kenneth Sookhai, who has been living in Garth Road for the past 25 years, the mad grab for land began in January just after Caroni workers received their documents on the VSEP.

“A lot of strange people are now coming into the area and working as if it is their own private property,” he said.  Sookhai, who said he had been employed with Caroni Limited for the past 22 years, said he was given a letter of comfort to squat on lands in Garth Road. However, his house stands on a half lot of land near the cane fields. Since the fields had been cleared following this year’s harvest, he had planned to plant vegetables to sell in the market. However, he had to deal with people who came in and built fences at the back of his house. “I am a quiet person. I don’t want any problems. I just want to live comfortably with my wife and two sons,” he said. Sookhai believes the people living in the area should be given preference for the lands for the purpose of planting sugar canes and other produce. He said the government has not outlined its plan to deal with Caroni lands, but people who have their roots in the sugar industry should be given the lands.

Relatives of Gerard Lewis, the prisoner who was found dead in a cell at the San Juan Police Station on Saturday, insisted yesterday that he did not commit suicide.

They are of the view that he was beaten to death, but a post mortem which was scheduled for yesterday was postponed to today because the mother of the dead man, who lives in Canada will arrive in the country today to identify the body. She asked the police yesterday to delay the post mortem until her arrival today. Gillian Garraway, a relative of the dead man insisted yesterday that Lewis was not a bandit nor a car thief. Newsday learned that Lewis never lived in one place and sometimes stayed at the home of his sister at Prizgar Lands, Laventill and at her home in Maloney. At the Forensic Science Centre yesterday, Garraway was allowed to view the body of Lewis. She said that she saw what appeared to be a mark around the neck of her cousin. Garraway added that the jersey which the police claimed Lewis used to hang himself at the cell of the station did not appear to be stretched. She revealed that her 25-year-old relative was never a suicidal person and loved his family very much.

The last time that she saw him alive was on Friday when he visited her and limed with her husband. She said that Lewis was also looking forward to seeing his mother who lives in Canada. Police officers said yesterday that Lewis was arrested on Saturday after he robbed a taxi-driver and two passengers. Reports revealed that around 11.15 am on Saturday, taxi-driver Gabriel Mejias was plying his taxi for hire, when Lewis asked to be taken to Alberto Street, St Joseph. On reaching Alberto Street, Lewis pointed a gun at Mejias and robbed him and two other passengers of cash. He then ordered them out of the vehicle and escaped in the car. A report was made to the San Juan Police and an All Points Bulletin was sent out to all police stations. Around 11.30 am, the car was seen in San Juan and Lewis was arrested. A .38 revolver was found in his possession.

Lewis was supposed to be placed on identification parades for other offences on Saturday but he complained of feeling unwell. Officers at the charge room at the San Juan Police Station claimed that Lewis was last seen alive at 1 pm. At 2 pm when they made a check, they saw him hanging from the ceiling at the cell. Newsday learned that during the day, police officers are required to make a check on prisoners in the cell block every hour and an entry is made in the diary. At nights they are required to make a check every half an hour and record their observations in the diary. Newsday learned that the mother of the dead man is expected to return to the country today and she has asked that a probe be launched into the death of her son. Police records revealed that Lewis had a matter pending in court for marijuana possession.

House Speaker Barry Sinanan has written to the National Trust stating that as far as he is aware the restored Red House is to be used “exclusively” for Parlia-ment. This is at sharp variance with what the country has been told by the Government.

The Speaker’s letter pre-dates the government’s declared intention to use the Red House for another purpose. The Government has made clear its intention to relocate the Parliament. The letter was dated February 20. The announcement of Government’s plan came on February 27 and was made by Minister of Public Administration, Dr Lenny Saith. The National Trust has officially written to the Speaker asking to what use the restored Red House was going to be put. The Speaker indicated in his reply that his understanding is the restored and adapted Red House is to be used exclusively by the Parliament upon its completion.

Sinanan also stated in the same letter that Phase 2 of the project —the restoration and renovation of the interior of the Red House to accommodate a modern Parliament — should have already started. This phase however has not even begun, partly due to delays as a result of the changes in government, the problem of funding and the intricate nature of the roof repairs which are currently being done. Sinanan is away for this week attending a conference in England on parliamentary practices and procedures.

Former Attorney General, Ramesh Lawrence-Maharaj said yesterday that Government’s decision to relocate the Parliament was illegal. “This decision is not in accordance with the settled Constitution convention and it would be contrary to the principles of public law,” he said. Maharaj said that the seat of Parliament cannot be changed by an Executive decision. He said requirements of Parliament, such as the site, housing and general suitability, could only be arrived at by a process of consultation involving the views of both Houses. This is normally done at the House Committee level and then a report presented to Parliament for further deliberation. Maharaj said the Executive is then entitled to make a decision, but only after discussion with members of the public, if that decision is contrary to the wishes of Parliament. Maharaj said that apart from the “immorality” and the lack of public consultation, the decision to oust Parliament for the Red House was also illegal. He said the Opposition, and any groups in the society can file for judicial review of the decision.

Independent Senator Kenneth Ramchand confirmed yesterday that judicial review was one of the options being considered. Ramchand said however that a public petition would be prepared in the first instance in an effort to get Government to review its decision. It is also understood that two motions — one in each House — will be filed by the end of this week, seeking to have Government reverse its decision to move the Parliament from its historic site. If this is done, the motion in the Upper House is expected to get the support of both the Opposition and Independent Senators, with the Senate President having to exercise a casting vote. Sources said that as long as the Presiding Officer understands that she/he must vote to maintain the status quo, any motion asking Government to leave the Parliament in the Red House is likely to to be approved..

Newsday was also informed that since the controversy developed, the Parliament department has been inundated with calls from persons wanting  information, records, historical documents and (parliamentary) proclamations. It has also received many calls from distraught and concerned members who are against the move and who are arguing that the Parliament is bigger than the Office of the Prime Minister.