Down Memory Lane -The Trial of Guy Pool

Down Memory Lane

Le Nouveau Seychelles Weekly has decided to serialise one of the most riveting and dramatic criminal trials of our times. This trial provides an in depth view of the way politics was being conducted in Seychelles in the 1970’s. Similarities between then and now are uncanny. It would also put our present political situation in a historical perspective. This trial single handedly held the imagination of our nation and was broadcasted on radio Seychelles every night. It was also serialise verbatim in “The People” which was the opposition’s mouthpiece then. The records of proceedings in this case has mysteriously disappeared from the court library. Although Mr. Albert Rene has filed several cases before the Courts recently, this is the only time he has taken the stand and deponed under oath. Some of the most brilliant lawyers of the region participated in this trial and turned it into a dramatic event on a national scale. The younger generation no doubt knows nothing about this trial but it shows that Seychelles politics then, was as dramatic and enthralling as any in the world. At the time politics were dominated by two charismatic young London trained Seychellois lawyers, Mr. James Mancham of the Seychelles Democratic Party and Mr. Albert Rene of the Seychelles People’s United Party. Mr. Rene was the complete antithesis of Mr. Mancham, both in terms of political ideology and character. Mr. Albert Rene is yet to publish his memoirs or biography but the trial is very revealing about the man, his intellect and his place in our political history. .

The trial started in July 1972 and lasted for several months. The presiding judge was Chief Justice Sir Georges Souyave. Mr. Guy Pool was represented by a brilliant Kenyan attorney, Mr. Kapila co-counsel to Mr. Valabhji. Mr. Kapila made his name in the trial of Jomo Kenyatta where he appeared as junior Counsel. Mr. Grimett appeared for the Crown and conducted the case for the Prosecution. Mr. O’Brien Queen was the Attorney General at the time and he was subsequently arrested and deported from Seychelles on the day of the Coup D’etat. Mr. Rene appeared as a key witness in the case. The testimony of Mr. Rene is compelling and makes fascinating reading. Several witnesses testified in this trial, including, but not limited to, Mr. Rene Vidot aka Flake, Mr. Claude Vidot, aka Pti Claude, Mrs Geva Rene, Mr. Stanley Hermitte and Mr. Guy Pool who testified in his own behalf in a trial within a trial, Mrs. Daphne Pool, amongst others. Mr. Guy Pool was charged with Wilfully and Unlawfully Causing an Explosion to Damage Property of Reef Hotel. Mr. Guy Pool was a Senior Security Guard at Reef Hotel. The trial reveals many interesting aspects of politics in Seychelles in the early years. It also raises a number of questions. Was Guy Pool acting alone? Guy Pool gave three confessions, was the entirety of his confessions true? Did the trial tell the whole story? Week after week “Le Nouveau Seychelles Weekly” will bring to its readership the full facts about the case of The Queen versus Guy Pool to relive one of the greatest criminal trials of our times.

The Guy Pool trial

Last week we looked at the cross examination of Dr. Macgregor. The testimony of Albert Desnousse who was arrested and detained in a seperate incident. He was being kept in a seperate cell at the time and was called as a witness for the Prosecution. This week we feature the statement of P.C Jena Quilindo. The statement of P.C Pierre Jean. Joe Martinez the proprietor of La Gigolette testified to the fact that Supt. David Ashford was present in his nightclub on the evening of 31st July 1972. We conclude with the cross-examination of Joe Martinez. Revealing that Supt. David Ashford did discuss the case concerning the bombing of the reef hotel when he was at bar talking to Mr. Joe Martinez.

Cross-examined:

Q. You said you heard a loud voice that night?

A. Yes.

Q. On how many occasions?

A. Not for long period. Only for a few seconds.

Q. Why were you in the cell that night?

A. I was arrested by the Immigration Officer because I got down from on board : my own way. I swam from the ship all the way down to the ground. I was put in the cell the day after. I was put in the cell on 31st July. That night I was worried about what would happen to me. I was told I had to give a statement to the police as to how I got off the ship. I made the statement. That was before the night I was kept in the cell.

Q. Why did you get back from the boat?

A. I was expected to sail to India and then back to Seychelles when they would decide what to do with me. I came from Kenya. I wanted to come to Seychelles. I was deported from Kenya. I was under deportation order.

Q. You heard loud voices that night?

A. It was not a very loud voice. It was a voice that was loud. It was someone saying in creole language “Ayoyo maman” and it stopped. I heard it only once. It was a loud voice which sounded on top of me. It said “ayoyo maman” and then it stopped.

Q. Did it stop like somebody in pain?

A. Probably yes. To me it looks like somebody being needled or pinned by something. It’s calling out to the mother. It was a voice as I shouted out in court. I was very much worried that night. Sometimes I lay down. I never had a good sleep. I could look through the bars of my cell and into the corridor. I went to the toilet once or twice that night. I saw a young lady passing along the corridor. I do not know whether she was going to the toilet. It was another lady from the one I saw next day who looked as if she’d been crying. The lady who passed was a tall girl.

(Daphne Pool is called into Court)

This is the lady who looked as if she had been crying. The lady who went past was not in uniform. She was wearing a dress. Guy’s cell was on the right of my cell and the lady was on the left. There was just one wall separating Guy’s cell from mine. The lady’s cell was about 3 or 4 cells away from mine. Next morning I saw the lady who just came into court. She was sitting on a chair outside and her brother was sitting on a wall. I saw Mr. Ashford pass once or twice that night. He passed through the corridor. He was alone. He passed about 2 or 3 times. I don’t know his name. I saw him only once. He is a young man. Mr. Ashford was alone when he passed. The Chinese officer was also alone. The tall girl passed and when she went back she came with another lady in uniform. There were 2 ladies, one in uniform and one in a dress. The one in the dress was not the one whom I just identified.

Mr. Ashford came to see me the next day. He said he was going to see the Governor about my release. It was the day after the night I’ve described. He came to my cell. I said I would be very pleased because I did not feel happy there. He did not ask me about the loud sounds I had heard that night. I did not ask him about it. He did not ask me whether I heard. He did not ask me anything concerning those two people. I have not seen Mr. Ashford after that occasion. Somewhere around 10 o’clock the Chief Minister came to see me in my cell. He introduced himself to me. I did not know him. There was a police officer there and a certain lawyer whom I don’t know. The police officer was in uniform. I do not know his name. If I see him I would recognized him. The lawyer was a white man. I do not know if he is Seychellois. They asked me about the way I’d got off the boat. They asked me whether I’d like to go back. I said no otherwise I’d be sentenced to another 10 years and I’d probably be brought back here after. I was sentenced in 2 cases, for a motor car and for money. Both occasion it involved motor car and money. On 1st occasion I was put on probation and on the 2nd occasion I was sentenced for 5 years after which I was deported. The Chief Minister said he would study my statement and he would let me know what he was going to do with me. That was the statement concerning my own trouble. I did not call for the Chief Minister or the lawyer. I think when Mr. Ashford went to see the Governor he was not present. I think it was Mr. Ashford who caused the C.M. and the lawyer to come there. Up to now I have not heard what is going to happen to me. Every Monday morning I have to report to Immigration Office. I’ve not been told whether I’ll be sent back to Kenya. I’ve not heard from the C.M. This is worrying me very much. I last saw Mr. Ashford when he asked me to come and see him to give a statement about Guy Pool and his sister. I do not remember the date, about 3 or 4 weeks ago. He took me from my home to the station. He sent a C.I.D from my home to the station. He sent a C.I.D Officer to fetch me. I do not know his name. Mr. Ashford took a statement from me. He asked me whether I would like to give a statement. I said yes because I would not like to get involved in anything which did not concern me. I gave him a statement. He told me “the day you were in the cell did you hear any scream.” I said “yes I heard something but I don’t know what was going on”. He wrote it down.

Q. He asked you did you hear any screams?

A. Yes.

Q. And you said yes but I don’t know what was going on?

A. Yes.

Q. Did he say to you what kind of screams?

A. No. I told him I had heard the words “Ayoyo Maman” in the statement. I was telling the truth. I told him I’d heard it only once. I think I told him that I saw the police officers passing in the corridor because he asked me if I’d seen people passing. I told him that next morning I had seen Guy and his sister outside. That Guy looked all right but his sister looked as if she had been crying. He wrote it all down. He read it back to me and I signed it. I have not seen Mr. Ashford since I made that statement to him. In last few days I’ve been waiting outside the court. Mr. Ashford did not speak to me at all.

Q. Did you say in your statement on 17/8 “whilst I was in the cells there was a brother and a sister also in custody in the cells. During the time I was in custody with theses 2 persons I did not see any ill-treatment of them. I did not hear any unusual sound.”

A. I did not say this last sentence. I did not read it myself. It was Mr. Ashford who read it back to me. If he had read that sentence to me I would have said that it was not so because I did hear and unusual sound. I was in custody for just that one night with them in the cells.

Q. Did you say “I noticed that both were permitted to be out of their cells, had special food brought to them, they were allowed to have cigarettes and books to read.”

A. About books it’s correct but I did not say the first part.

Q. Mr. Ashford had a lady with him when he took the statement?

A. Yes. I don’t know her name. She was the same one I’d seen passing in the corridor. Since then I’ve not seen that lawyer again or the policeman that was with him or the C.M.

Re-examination: (shown statement)

I can’t read that statement. I told Mr. Ashford I heard a sound but I did not know what it was. Now I come to understand because there was something going on upstairs. It was not a scream but a shout “ayoyo maman” only once.

A.G. : I produce the statement. Exhibit I

Witness : I did not see any ill-treatment of the accused. I said to Mr. Ashford in my statement that both were permitted to be out of their cells. I did not say “Had special food brought to them”. I said thay were allowed to have cigarettes because they were smoking. I was in my cell and I could not know everything that was going on in the police station that night. I told Mr. Ashford that the lady looked as if she had been crying. I described the sound which I heard. To me I thought it was a drunkard in the street. I did not pay any particular attention to it. It was not very loud.

The witness, Desnousse was then questioned by the Court. He replied as follows :-

“There is the main street near the police station. It was not my impression that the sound came from the street. It sounded as if it came from the top. It might have come from the street. To me it sounded like a woman’s voice. It did not come from the cells. That was the only thing I heard. Next morning I saw her in the corner of the wall in the compound of the cell. She was sitting. It was 9 or 10. It was then that I noticed she had been crying. Her face was red. She was wiping her face all the time. She had a towel around her neck. I was about 25 yards from her. About from where I am to the verandah. She had a towel around her neck. She was wiping her face all the time. Tears were flowing down her eyes.”

By A.G. through Court :

Her brother was sitting on a wall before you get to the main door to the corridor. He was about 5ft from me and about 20 yds from her. The brother was not crying. He did not look as someone who had been crying.

Mr. Kapila: No questions.

Witness excused from Court.

Mr. Kapila : I apply for bail for the accused. There are no special grounds why accused should be deprive of it. The application now is considerably stronger and based on stronger material than when I first urged it before Justice Sauzier. Apart from 2 police officers to be recalled as a result of the last witness’ evidence, this is the completion of the trial within a trial. Apart from what we have 3 prison officers and one or two other witnesses. There are no grounds for keeping the accused in custody. Accused is already put under enormous handicap. He has to give instructions. Time for that purpose is limited. He has to look for his witnesses. It’s unfair against accused. The normal ground can be laid down either in terms or sureties or by some sort of a reporting order. It was put in vaguest terms by Mr. Grimmett why accused should be held in custody.

A.G : It is not crown’s fault that case has been delayed further. My friend says that there are stronger grounds now than before. I submit there are stronger grounds for retaining accused in custody. Your Lordship has heard uncontested evidence from Hermitte that accused told him he planted the bomb at Reef Hotel. Trial within trial has not yet been decided. If your Lordship rules that confession is admissible, the case would have been established and accused could not have been released on bail. Accused is charged with an offence which carries sentence of life imprisonment. Nature of charge is very serious and is one that is likely to be repeated. Your Lordship heard from two witnesses that interference in going on at the moment. That Daphne Pool who is on bail herself has been approaching witnesses and one Philibert Loizeau has been interfering with witnesses. Due to nature of case itself accused may very well be in need of protection. His remaining in prison may obviate any means of this being done to him. Art. 204 Archbold – Criminal Justice Act 1967. para (5) Crown in England look upon explosive cases as very serious and Your Lordship should consider that before granting bail. In those circumstances I would point out that the case has gone on a long was and a lot of evidence has been given. My friend’s argument that it would be easier for him to take instructions from accused if he is out. I submit my friend won’t be in. Any instructions can be got at the prisons, a few minutes drive from Mr. Valabhji’s office. We must be fair to people of Seychelles and to their property. Danger that another explosion may take place. If accused is allowed out on bail he may do so again.

I submit in the circumstances Your Lordship should not grant bail in this case.

Mr. Kapila : I submit onus is on prosecution to justify refusal of bail. Statement that accused has proffensity of destroying property is an unjustified statement. No suggestion that accused is a man of bad character. My friend’s submission is based on ground that accused is guilty. Defence knows this offence is serious. Our duty is to show that this accused is not guilty of such offence. I have my views of the merits of the prosecution but I would rather leave it to Your Lordship whether Hermitte’s evidence can be described as uncontradicted is up to Your Lordship. My friend said two witnesses have been interfered with. In both cases my friend wanted to have them declared hostile. He did so in the first instance and with the last witness he has tried to disprove his evidence. It is not however accused who interfered with the witnesses. My being in Nairobi has nothing to do with taking instructions. Mr. Valabhji is here. Prosecution has Scotland Yard over here. Accused too has to have the chance to retrace his movements. The remark that this it’s my fault that the case is delayed is unfair. End of case is distant in any case. I appeal to Your Lordship to grant bail.

Order: Having regard to the nature of the accusation, the nature of the evidence in support of the accusation and the severity of the punishment which if this accused is convicted will entail and having regard to all the circumstances of the case I am not prepared to grant this application for bail. Accused’s application for bail is refused. He will be remanded in custody until Thusday 14th September at 8.30 a.m. for continuation. It is to be recorded that the court would have been quite prepared to continue the case on Monday 11th and the consecutive days but to meet the convenience of Mr. Kapila that it has been adjourned to Thursday 14th for continuation.

P.W. 25 P.C Jena Quilindo

On Monday 31st July 1972 I was on duty at Central Police Station from 4 p.m. to midnight. I was the cell supervisor and I had the 2 keys for 2 cells with me. The 2 keys are given to me so that no one will go to these cells. I was there from 4 to midnight. During that time nobody entered the cells. To enter the cells they would have to take the keys from me. No one took the keys from me. From 4 to midnight while I was there I did not hear any screams. At midnight I was relieved by P.C. Pierre Jean. I handed the keys to him. Guy Pool and Harry Bonte were in the cells that day. There were 3 people in the cells, Guy Pool, Harry Bonte and Daphne Pool.

Cross-examined:

Q. When was a statement taken by the police from you for the 1st time concerning this case?

A. Day before yesterday?

Q. By whom?

A. Cpl. Esparon.

Q. You were relieved at midnight by P.C Pierre Jean?

A. Yes.

Q. To your knowledge was a statement taken from him at the same time?

A. I don’t know.

Q. Who was the duty officer that night?

A. I have forgotten.

Q. Whose duty is it to do a routine check of the cells during the night?

A. They come and check the cells at 4 p.m. and apart from that they do not come again.

Q. Until the following morning?

A. Yes.

Q. What time?

A. I do not know.

Q. You must have been on duty from midnight onwards?

A. Yes. I finish at 8 a.m.

Q. On these occasions nobody checks the cells during that time?

A. No.

P.W. 26 P.C. Pierre Jean

Pierre Jean. On Tuesday 1st August 1972 I was on duty at Central Police Station. I was sentry at the gate leading to the cells. I have to keep watch of the gate and I patrol at the gate. While I am there people have a right to go to the cells. I would have to open the gate for them. That night I opened the gate for Mr. Ashford. It was about 12.05 or 12.10 a.m. after I had started duty. Mr. Ashford asked me to open the gate which I did. He walked along the cells until the end and then he came back immediately. I did not see or hear him talk to anyone in the cells. While he walked along he was always in my view. After that Mr. Ashford left immediately and I locked the gate. I kept the key. About 2 hours later Insp. Lau Tee came. He told me to open the gate. I did so. He entered he walked along and then he came back. When he passed Guy Pool’s cell, Guy Pool called out “Sergeant” and Insp. Lau Tee went nearer. They spoke but I did not hear or understand what they said. They spoke across the grills. I did not hear what they said because I was at a fair distance from them. While they were calling I heard Guy Pool calling out “Daphne I will make a statement and you also will say what you know”. Daphne replied I heard her say “be oui” (all right). Inspector Lau Tee came out. I closed the gate and locked it. After that nothing happened.

After he had left about 3.40 Mr. Ashford arrived with W.P.C. Stravens. They asked me to open the gate which I did. P.C. Stravens went to Daphne’s cell and Mr. Ashford went to Guy Pool’s cell. The cells were opened. I heard all 4 of them speaking then they all came out and went along. When I say “they came out” I mean Mr. Ashford, W.P.C Stravens, Guy Pool and sister Dahpne. They went out I do not know where. They walked along the corridor. Then they went out of my sight. Mr. Ashford opened Guy Pool’s cell door and W.P.C Stravens opened Daphne Pool’s cell door.

The key to Guy Pool’s was with me. I gave it to Mr. Ashford. On his last visit he came to me and took the key from me. The key to Daphne’s cell was with WPC Stravens I think. I was not in charge of the cells in which woman are kept.

While I was there I did not hear nor see any screaming or brutality used on anybody. I left duty at 8 a.m. I did not hear anyone shout. I was awake all the time. Mr. Ashford did not give me back the key to Guy Pool’s cell. While I was still on duty Guy Pool was brought back to the cell. That was about 7.15 a.m. I was not given back the key to the cell again. I think it was returned to the corporal in charge.

I gave the key to Mr. Ashford at 3.40.

Cross-examined :

Q. When was a statement taken from you for the 1st time concerning this case?

A. On 12th September.

Q. Day before yesterday?

A. Yes about 4 p.m.

Q. You said Miss Stravens was in charge of the women prisoners?

A. Yes and she had the key to their cell doors. There was only one woman prisoner in the cell. It was Daphne Pool. I cannot say from what time to what time W.P.C Stravens was on duty but when she came at 3.40 I saw her. Before 3.40 I did not see her there. From midnight to 3.40 I did not see anybody but according to me W.P.C. Straven must have been in charge of the woman prisoner. From midnight to 3.40 I did not have the key to Daphne’s cell door.

Q. If Daphne had wanted to go to the toilet who would have opened the cell?

A. I cannot tell.

Q. You couldn’t have?

A. No. I had no key to that cell.

Q. Somebody has to be on duty at the station with the key to each cell?

A. It would have to be the policeman on duty there or it had to be Miss Stravens. I had the key to Guy’s cell. I could not have left the station for 2 hours.

Q. You mentioned 12.05 to 12.10 and 3.40. How can you remember these exact times?

A. After the bell had chimed midnight. I had a watch with me. I still have it (shown his watch to counsel). I used it.

Q. You said 2 hours after Mr. Lau Tee left, Mr. Ashford came. In your statement did you say “about 00.05 hrs. Mr. Ashford approached me?

A. Yes that was about. My watch is not a stopwatch. I set it 5 minutes in advance. I said “about”. My watch has a second hand. I did not look at it then. It is very small.

Q. In your statement did you say “about 2.30 a.m. Inspector Lau Tee came”?

A. Yes it was about 2.30. When Mr. Ashford returned it was about 3.40. All these times are according to my watch. Cpl. Esparon called me on the 12th to make a statement.

Q. You said you do not know whether Inspector Lau Tee spoke to anyone you did not see?

A. Yes it was when he came back that he spoke. When he walked up the cells I did not see if he spoke to anyone.

Q. Has Mr. Ashford spoken to you about that case at any time?

A. No.

By Court:

Q. You are sure of this?

A. Yes.

By Mr. Kapila:

It was only on 12th that Cpl. Esparon approached me regarding a statement. Mr. Ashford was not around.

Q. Before 12th Mr. Ashford never asked you about that night?

A. No.

Q. Did you hear any drunkard that night shouting on the street?

A. No.

Q. Anyone in a woman’s voice crying “ayoyo maman”?

A. I did not hear.

Q. Did you know Guy or Daphne before that night?

A. I had seen his sister, she worked at Reef Hotel but I did not know her name. I had not spoken to them before. Before I went on duty at midnight I did not speak to either of them. There were 3 prisoners in the cells that night including these 2. The 3rd one was a man.

Q. You said you heard pool calling out “Daphne I will make a statement, you also say what you know”?

A. I heard him say so. His cell was the nearest cell to me. I could not see him.

Q. Did you see Mr. Wen Yam that night?

A. No.

Re-examination:

Q. Was there a toilet in Daphne Pool’s cell?

A. I have never visited the cell.

Q. You don’t know?

A. No.

Q. How do you know it was Guy Pool who spoke to Inspector Lau Tee?

A. Because he called out “sergent” and the Insp. Went nearer the cell. His cell was the nearest one to the gate.

By Court:

I have been in the police force for 7 months.

No further questions. Witness released.

P.W. 27 Joe Martinez

Joe Martinez. I am the proprietor of La Gigolette. I was present there on evening of 31st July, 1972. Mr. Ashford was there that evening. I do not know exactly when but he was there between 10 and 11. I saw him the whole time he was there. I spoke to him. He had a drink with me and had something to eat and we had a chat. He stayed about half an hour. It could be around 11 or 11.30 when he left, possibly earlier. He was alone. I did not see him again that evening or earlier on in the morning. Certainly during the week he came back to La Gigolette. I can’t say when but he came frequently sometimes alone sometimes with company. He came back with a tall police woman on the Tuesday or Wednesday following 31st July. I think it was a Tuesday. He was asked to throw someone out of La Gigolette. It was a Seychellois who was drunk. Mr. Ashford was sober.

I serve meals to take away. Mr. Ashford has had occasions to take meals away quite often, late in the evening. Anytime between 11 and 2. He has been to La Gigolette accompanied by a Chinese looking officer. They came last night. They came also around July. They bought some food to take away. To my knowledge Mr. Ashford has never misbehaved in La Gigolette. He did not wave a key around. There was nobody drunk in the club on the night of 31st July, not to my knowledge. There was nobody apparently drunk.

Cross-examined :

Q. When did the police question you about these events of 31st July?

A. I was not questioned. I was asked this morning for the first time. I was asked to come to the police station at 8.30 a.m. The A.G. asked me. I saw Mr. Stone and Mr. Ashford. Mr. Stone took a statement from me. Mr. Ashford walked out when I gave my statement. I had 2 days in which to think about it. I heard the Club mentioned over the radio. I was not told I would be a witness until this morning. My place is a restaurant and night club with a bar. The people do not have to sign a register. It is not popular yet, not as popular as I would like it to be.

If you asked me who came on 31st July I would not have a register or diary from which to refresh my memory. It would be difficult to say what time someone came to the club about six weeks ago. Mr. Ashford had not been there for quite a long time before 31st July. That night he had a beer and a sandwich. I offered him a beer. I can’t remember what type of sandwhich had had. I do, he had ham and cheese.

It was in the next night or the night after. The Monday night was a very quiet night. When he threw the drunk out it was a busy night. That was the only night Mr. Ashford threw someone out. I think it was probably on the Tuesday.

Q. Since that night until this morning has Mr. Ashford spoken to you about this case?

A. He discussed the case with me. That was on that Monday. He told me he had arrested people concerning the bomb explosion at the Reef. It was on Monday evening. He did not say anything else about the case. Since that day Mr. Ashford has not come to me and mentioned about his coming to the restaurant that night. I do not know the name of the Seychellois who was thrown out, he had a moustache. I remember he fell asleep. I do not remember anyone called Yvon Bastienne. I do not know anybody called Claude Savy. I know many faces. (a person is called into court giving his name as Claude Savy).

Witness :

He has been at the bar. I do not recollect his being at the bar on Monday 31st. On that morning David and I had the bar to ourselves apart from the barman. When I say David I mean Mr. Ashford. We are on 1st name terms. He brought me to court this morning.

Re-examination:

At the time Mr. Ashford was there we had the bar to ourselves. People may have dropped in for a drink.

A.G.: This is the end of my case of the trial within a trial.

Mr. Kapila: Procedure for trial within a trial is well established.

Your Lordship’s observations earlier on has basis of what I’m going to submit. Trial within a trial is complete within itself. In this case (1) Mr. Wen Yam who gave evidence about giving caution to accused, after trial within trial commenced he said no word about cautioning the accused at all. Document must be identified and marked and made an exhibit. It’s material on which court has to decide. Statement never tendered. (2) Prosecution has adduced evidence which is contradictory, difficult to reconcile from one witness to another. At the end of prosecution case there must be reasonable doubt as to voluntary nature of statement.