High Court Judge Gino Persaud on Monday reserved October 30, 2017, for a ruling on whether he will issue an order prohibiting the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) from holding to the charge of murder against the young, flambouyant philanthropist Marcus Bisram.
It is now just about a year since the young carpenter, Faiyaz Narinedatt was found dead on the Number 70 Village Public Road on the Corentyne Coast and this move in the High Court represents another twist in this sensational case.
Lawyers for Marcus Bisram, the colourful figure known for generous donations to charitable causes, wants an order from the High Court that could have the Police dismiss the charge of murder brought against him.
BIsram is the one who is accused of telling others to kill the young carpenter.
Police at first treated the case as a road fatality when Narinedatt was found dead by the roadside but Georgetown Police was sent to the Corentyne and took on the case as a homicide.
On March 7, last year, Bisram was charged with the murder. Police believe he is the one who issued the instructions that led five others to kill Narinedatt. The Police’s claim is that at the party on the night of October 31, Bisram made sexual advances against Narinedatt, including touching his penis, and when Narinedatt refused, by slapping him, he told others to kill the carpenter.
The only witness in the case, a teenager who is unable to read and write, claims to have heard Marcus give the instructions to beat Narinedatt until he was dead.
Now, in a committal trial in a Berbice Magistrate’s Court in late July of this year, the witness was asked whether he could tell if what was on the written statement was true and he said he couldn’t.
He was asked by Bisram’s lawyer, Sanjeev Datadin if indeed he at first told the Police he didn’t know about this story, and he replied in the affirmative.
Bisram’s lawyer is using what was said in the Magistrate’s Court to argue that the witness recanted his written statement and therefore the DPP ought to say on what basis she was continuing to press charges against Bisram.
Datadin argued in the High Court that the DPP must have evidence that could lead to a successful prosecution and in this case, she has none, and so should be prohibited from continuing to hold the charge against Bisram.
The Prosecution is, however, arguing that the main witness was never asked about the statement Bisram made to kill Narinedatt, whether that was indeed what he heard or not.
Further, the prosecution argued that when the witness said he told Police he didn’t know anything about the story, it was not made clear what story he meant, whether it was the statement about what he heard Bisram said or about the actual murder.
The Prosecution argued that the teen witness did not claim to witness a murder or who did it, just that he heard that Bisram told the others to kill Narinedatt and for the prosecution, that has not been questioned.
Meanwhile, Datatin will also be moving to the High Court to have the charges against the five others dropped.
