“Wet Ink” SOPs Claim Rocks Election Fraud Trial; Defense Raises Chain of Custody Concerns

By Travis Chase | HGP Nightly News|

GEORGETOWN, GUYANA – The courtroom fell completely silent as Bibi Anieshaw Mohamed, the People’s Progressive Party/Civic’s (PPP/C) Chief Data Analyst during the contentious March 2020 elections, delivered what is now being viewed as one of the most explosive moments yet in the long-running election fraud trial.

Under intense cross-examination by defense attorney Eusi Anderson before Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty, Mohamed admitted under oath that several Statements of Poll (SOPs) handed over to her by party agents contained original, “wet ink” signatures and markings.

The Legal Anomaly of the “Wet Ink” SOPs

The revelation has sent shockwaves through the legal proceedings due to established electoral procedures. In Guyana, when counting finishes at a polling station, the Presiding Officer signs the original SOP in fresh ink. By law, that original “wet ink” document is sealed and sent directly to the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) secretariat.

Political party agents are only supposed to receive carbon duplicates or photocopies. The discovery of original ink markings on documents held by a political party as early as March 3, 2020—just one day after the election—has cracked open severe questions regarding the chain of custody and overall integrity of the evidence.

• The Admission: When pressed twice by Anderson on the physical nature of the ,2339 SOPs in her possession, Mohamed conceded that while many were carbon copies or duplicates, a distinct number featured original handwriting.
• The Recollection: While she noted she could not recall whether the ink utilized was blue or black, she explicitly affirmed that she distinctly remembered seeing original wet ink entries in the vote tally sections.

The Pivot and the Magistrate’s Intervention

Realizing the potential damage of the admission to the prosecution’s narrative, the atmosphere in the courtroom grew visibly tense as Mohamed later tried to backtrack on her statements regarding the fresh ink markings.

However, following heated legal submissions by State Prosecutor Rampersaud, Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty intervened. The Chief Magistrate flatly rejected any attempt to erase the admission, ruling that Mohamed’s initial testimony regarding the wet ink would remain a permanent, un-editable part of the court record.

Questions Raised Over Unadvertised Promotion

Before the bombshell disclosure regarding the SOPs, the defense also grilled Mohamed about her rapid professional ascent under the current administration.

Mohamed confirmed to the court that following the 2020 election cycle, she moved swiftly from her role as Director of the Learning Channel to being appointed as the Director of Government Efficiency within the Office of the President. When questioned about the transparency of the hiring process, Mohamed openly admitted that she was appointed directly by President Irfaan Ali and never had to formally apply for the high-level state position.

The Defense Strategy Moving Forward

The defense team, representing several former senior GECOM functionaries accused of conspiring to alter the 2020 election results, is capitalizing on the testimony to undermine the credibility of the state’s foundation.

With the court locking in the “wet ink” admission, defense counsel Eusi Anderson is now legally positioned to argue that the PPP/C was in possession of primary GECOM documents that should have been under strict state security. This development shifts a heavy burden onto the prosecution to explain how official, original election materials bypassed legal protocols to land in the hands of a contesting political party.

The trial continues before Chief Magistrate McGusty as more witnesses are slated to take the stand.