New Surveillance Footage Directly Contradicts Senior Superintendent Prem Narine’s Account of October 12 Shooting Involving Azruddin Mohamed

By Travis Chase | HGP Nightly News |

GEORGETOWN, GUYANA — The official police narrative surrounding the high-profile armed confrontation on October 12 outside the Barr Street, Kitty residence of Special Branch Head, Senior Superintendent Prem Narine, has been thrown into serious doubt following the emergence of newly surfaced surveillance video recordings.

The visual evidence appears to directly contradict key assertions in Narine’s official witness statement to criminal investigators, complicating an already explosive case at the center of Guyana’s national security and political landscape.

The developments unfold even as forensic swab results reportedly indicate that Leader of the Opposition Azruddin Mohamed and his personal driver tested positive for gunshot residue (GSR)—a technical finding that the defense argues is consistent with being fired upon inside a confined space rather than discharging a weapon.

Video Analysis: Discrepancies in the Special Branch Commander’s Narrative

The newly reviewed surveillance recordings, captured from multiple camera angles along Barr Street, Kitty, document the precise physical movements of the vehicles, driver positioning, and initial firearm discharges during the October 12 encounter:

• Sequence of Initial Discharges: In his formal statements to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), Senior Superintendent Narine maintained that occupants inside Mohamed’s vehicle initiated hostile, threatening actions that prompted defensive fire. However, the footage indicates that Narine’s posture and vehicle approach occurred prior to any defensive maneuvering by Mohamed’s vehicle, raising questions regarding who drew and discharged weapons first.
• Proximity and Vehicle Trajectory: The digital logs show Mohamed’s vehicle stationary along the roadway before Narine’s movement, challenging claims that the opposition leader’s vehicle was executing an ambush or offensive block.
• Visibility of Handguns: While police reports described multiple armed occupants aiming weapons outwardly from Mohamed’s vehicle, the visual record shows no clear outward muzzle deployment prior to the rapid exchange of gunfire that shattered the vehicle’s windows.

The Forensic Paradox: Gunshot Residue vs. Closed-Cabin Contamination

Parallel to the visual evidence, forensic pathology and ballistic reports have introduced competing interpretations regarding physical trace evidence:

• Positive GSR Findings: Ballistic swab analysis conducted on Azruddin Mohamed and his driver reportedly returned positive traces of gunshot residue (primer discharge particles containing lead, barium, and antimony) on their hands and clothing.
• The Defense Explanation: Senior Counsel representing Mohamed argued that positive GSR findings are the predictable consequence of an assassination attempt. When multiple rounds from high-caliber sidearms penetrate a vehicle’s cabin, particulate discharge instantly saturates the enclosed interior, depositing airborne chemical residue across non-firing occupants.
• Absence of Recovered Shell Casings Matching Defense: Ballistics technicians recovered spent casings matching the service-issued firearm of Senior Superintendent Narine, while state investigators have yet to tender recovered casings conclusively linked to a separate firearm discharged from inside Mohamed’s vehicle.

Political Fallout and the Surveillance Leak Nexus

The emergence of the video recording carries profound legal and political ramifications for several parallel court battles currently gripping the country:

• The Cybercrime Remand: Mohamed and 20-year-old Police Constable Ryan Greene were remanded to prison on October 30 by Magistrate Abigail Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrates’ Court under Section 9 of the Cybercrime Act 2018. They stand accused of unlawfully obtaining and disseminating surveillance files from the National Data Centre / Police Command Centre—the exact recordings now proving critical to assessing the truth of the Kitty encounter.
• Allegations of an Assassination Attempt: Mohamed has consistently maintained that the Kitty incident was an orchestrated state assassination attempt led by high-ranking police officers rather than a routine altercation, citing the footage as his primary defense.
• Calls for External Oversight: With the recordings now publicly challenging the account of the head of the Guyana Police Force’s primary intelligence wing, opposition parties—including the PNCR/APNU, Alliance For Change (AFC), and the Forward Guyana Movement—are demanding an independent international forensic probe into both the shooting and the subsequent handling of the Command Centre archives.

As High Court hearings on bail and affidavit admissibility continue before Justice Priscilla Chandra-Hanif, the disputed video footage remains the focal point of a national debate over police integrity, state surveillance, and the rule of law.