| Minibus conductor Orvin Roberts was yesterday acquitted of the murder of drug store proprietor Harold Rachpaul, after a mixed jury returned a not guilty verdict in relation to the offence.Roberts, of ‘C’ Field Sophia, Greater Georgetown, had faced a trial before Justice Navindra Singh and mixed jury at the Georgetown High Court.Rachpaul, 84, was found gagged, strangled and bound with an electrical cord in his apartment located behind his business, Rachpaul’s Drug Store, on Robb Street, Georgetown. The incident occurred sometime between August 18 and August 19, 2011, during the course of a burglary.A post mortem report, presented in court stated that the elderly businessman died as a result of asphyxiation due to compression to the neck,Cheap Jerseys From China, compounded by blunt trauma.Following the summing up of evidence presented in the trial by Justice Singh yesterday, the case was handed over to the jury for deliberations. A few hours later, the panel returned to the courtroom, with a unanimous verdict of not guilty.Roberts immediately thanked the judge and jurors, and also expressed his gratitude to his attorney, Nigel Hughes. Hughes represented Roberts in association with Attorneys-at- law, Savannah Barnwell and Kezia Williams.“Mr. Roberts you are free to go… Good luck,” said Justice Singh to the former accused, who blissfully walked out of the courtroom. Outside the courtroom, Roberts wrapped his armed around his relatives.Roberts was the sole person accused of killing the prominent Robb Street businessman. According to reports Rachpaul’s killer had apparently forced him to open a vault which contained a large sum of cash, phone cards and other documents before murdering him. Police witnesses testifying in the trial had claimed that fingerprints found inside a safe at the scene of the murder tied Roberts to the crime.On Wednesday Assistant Superintendent of Police, Raffeik Ali, told the court that based on the analysis he conducted, the fingerprint impressions taken at the crime scene matched the prints police obtained from Roberts.But Ali was faced with a series of questions by Defence Counsel, Nigel Hughes, regarding the precision and accuracy of his analysis. The policeman insisted that the prints belonged to Roberts. He said that the prints had undergone computer analysis as well as manual examination.He held that the computer identifies possibilities of a fingerprint match but the manual examination, can confirm it. In his closing address, Hughes pointed to the fact that there were no signs of forced entry to the building in which the elderly businessman was murdered. The attorney noted too, that the only persons with access to the premises were the elderly man, his son and grandson – the latter two were never considered suspects to the crime nor were they questioned by the police regarding their whereabouts on the night of the murder.He underlined too that both the victim’s son, Leonard Rachpaul and grandson Vincent had testified that a Transport (Deed of Title) was among the items stolen from the Robb Street premises.But in her arguments, State Prosecutor Narissa Leander said that the fingerprints found at the scene could not have belonged to anyone other than the accused. She said that the fact that Robert’s fingerprints matched the ones found on the inside of a safe at the crime scene, indisputably linked him to the murder. She had urged the jury to use their commonsense and good judgment, when reviewing evidence of the case. |
