Thursday, July 24, 2025
HomeNewsDAY 18 ELECTION FRAUD TRIAL… WITNESS MISIDENTIFIES DEFENDANT, AS AUDIO EVIDENCE CHALLENGED

DAY 18 ELECTION FRAUD TRIAL… WITNESS MISIDENTIFIES DEFENDANT, AS AUDIO EVIDENCE CHALLENGED

Court Hears Testimony on 2020 Election Tabulation, Audio Evidence Contested

By Tiana Cole | HGP Nightly News

The trial surrounding the 2020 general and regional elections, which were controversial, continued on Wednesday with testimony from Jonathan Yearwood, a former accredited counting agent for the political party A New and United Guyana (ANUG).

Yearwood told the court that on March 12, 2020, he was present at the Ashmins Building, where Returning Officer Clement Mingo allegedly told party representatives that the process underway was tabulation, not verification of votes.

He further testified that on March 4, 2020, he observed GECOM staffer Bobb-Cummings calling out results. However, when asked in court to identify her, Yearwood mistakenly pointed to someone else. Despite the misidentification, Yearwood stated he had recorded the events on his phone and later handed over those recordings to the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) on September 1, 2020.

Detective Inspector Junior Blair, who headed the Forensic Video Analysis Unit at the time, was then called to the stand. Blair, recognized as an expert in multiple courts, was formally designated as an expert witness for the extraction and authentication of video and audio recordings. He confirmed receiving the files from Yearwood and securing them with his official markings.

Lead prosecutor Latchmie Rahamat moved to tender the audio files as evidence. However, defense attorney Eusi Anderson raised strong objections. Anderson argued that the chain of custody was compromised, Yearwood could not definitively verify the identity of the person in the recordings, and that in an era of advanced AI technology and a five-year time lapse, the materials were unreliable and prejudicial.

He described the content of the disc as lacking evidentiary value, while the prosecution countered by citing Section 92 of the Evidence Act, stating proper procedures were followed in acquiring and presenting the material.

Acting Chief Magistrate Sherdel Isaacs-Marcus deferred her ruling on whether the disc will be admitted as evidence. The case is set to resume on June 27.

RELATED ARTICLES

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -

Most Popular

Recent Comments