Sexual assault allegations: Insufficient “credible evidence” to charge Dharamlall – Police

Two weeks after new sexual assault allegations against former Local Government and Regional Development Minister Nigel Dharamlall surfaced from a 28-year-old woman, the Guyana Police Force (GPF) on Friday stated that there is insufficient evidence to institute criminal charges against him.
In a statement to the media, the GPF stated that, on May 23, it received legal advice indicating that there was insufficient evidence to charge Dharamlall for the rape and sexual assault allegations made against him.

“The legal advice was based on the fact that there were several inconsistencies and discrepancies in the complainant’s story,” the police have said. In addition, statements taken from several persons have contradicted the complainant’s story.
“These included alibi witnesses who placed Nigel Dharamlall in a different region on the date that the alleged incident occurred in September 2020. Statements also disclosed that Nigel Dharamlall is not the owner of the house where the alleged incident occurred in January 2021, and he has no access to same.”
In light of these disclosures, among others, the police legal advisor has concluded that there is insufficient credible evidence by which to institute charges against Dharamlall, and there is no realistic prospect of securing a conviction in these matters.
“In keeping with the Code for Prosecutors, a case which does not pass this evidential stage must not proceed, no matter how serious or sensitive it may be,” the statement has added.
Earlier in the month, the complainant hosted a virtual press conference in which she detailed two alleged separate incidents when she was sexually molested by the former minister. The first, she alleged, was committed back in September 2020 at State House in Anna Regina, Region Two (Pomeroon-Supenaam). Recounting that incident, the woman claimed that her alleged abuser, who was a minister at the time, had invited her there to be interviewed for a job. She alleged that, upon arriving, she was taken into a bedroom, where she was sexually assaulted.
The woman revealed that the second incident allegedly occurred in 2021 at the former minister’s residence in Cummings Lodge. She admitted that she was hesitant to report the matter, blaming her hesitancy on the extent of corruption within the Guyana Police Force and, more importantly, she did not want her name to be dragged “into the mud.”
Following the accusations, Dharamlall issued a statement that vehemently refuted the claims made against him. He expressed awareness of the alleged victim’s press conference, where she levelled ‘malicious’ allegations against him, and he began by outrightly denying each accusation put forth by the woman.
Nevertheless, he stated that he had personally known the woman for several years, and had always maintained a most civil and cordial relationship with her, including socialising on many occasions. He added that her demeanour towards him changed fundamentally after he rebuffed her advances and spurned her attempts to engage in an intimate relationship.
A few days later, he turned up at the Cove and John Police Station, East Coast Demerara (ECD) with a team of lawyers led by Attorney-at-Law Bernard DaSilva, where he was interrogated about the sexual assault allegations made against him by the young woman. He was later released, and the case file was sent to the Police legal advisor to determine the way forward.
In June 2023, Dharamlall was arrested at the Brickdam Police Station for questioning in relation to rape allegations levelled against him by a 16-year-old lass. He was subsequently released on $1 million station bail. No charge was instituted based on advice from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Shalimar Ali-Hack, following a statement from the teenager that was delivered to the police by her mother.
The teenager, in that statement, indicated that she wanted no further action on the matter. In light of that, the DPP concluded that in the absence of the victim’s complaint, there was no legal provision for the police to proceed with the matter.
The DPP also disclosed that consideration was given to the fact that the complainant had given a further statement to investigators to the effect that she wished to withdraw her complaint against Dharamlall, that her decision was not influenced by anyone, and that it was in her best interest to do so. (G11)