Down Memory Lane

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. 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. We will study his style of leadership in opposition. We will go into his psyche. We will look at his psychology and try to understand why he did what he did, when he was in opposition. At this critical moment in his political history, Mr. Rene was literally fighting for his political life. His answers to questions put to him in cross examination by the Attorney General, Mr. O’Brien Queen, are fascinating and intriguing.

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. The young and dynamic Davies cross-examined Mr. Rene who 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. T he 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.

We start at the beginning……….

The Guy Pool trial

On Monday, 4th September, 1972, before his Lordship Sir Louis Georges Souyave, Chief Justice of Seychelles, started the trial of Guy Pool, charged with willfully and unlawfully causing an explosion at the Reef Hotel likely to cause damage to property.

Guy Pool was arrested by Superintendent David Ashford on Monday, 29th July, 1972. He was charged and brought before the Magistrate’s Court on Wednesday, 31st July, 1972. The prosecution was conducted by Superintendent David Ashford. The accused was represented by Mr. R. Valabhji, Attorney-at-law. The Magistrate was Mr. Frank Woods. When the accused appeared before the Magistrate, Superintendent David Ashford asked that he should be kept in custody at the Central Police Station cells and not at the prison. His counsel requested that the accused should be remanded at the Union Vale prison. The Magistrate ordered that the accused should be remanded in police custody at the Central Police Station. The reason put forward by Superintendent David Ashford was the accused would be safer at the Police Station.

After the accused had been in custody for nine of the fourteen days, on Wednesday, 9th August 1972, he was brought before the same Magistrate again. This time the prosecution was conducted by Mr. Grimmett of the Crown Law Office. The prosecution made no request that the accused should be remanded at the Police Station any longer and on this occasion the Magistrate remanded the accused at the Union Vale Prison. The accused was remanded to appear before the Supreme Court the next day. On Thursday, 10th August, 1972, the accused appeared before Mr. Justice Sauzier in the Supreme Court. His counsel informed the Court that the accused would be represented by Mr. A.R. Kapila of Nairobi who would be arriving that afternoon from Nairobi. Mr. Justice Sauzier adjourned the case to the next morning and ordered that the accused should be remanded at the Union Vale Prisons.

That afternoon the plane taking Mr. Kapila from Nairobi to Seychelles was ordered back to Nairobi after a phony bomb hoax had forced the airline to order its plane back. The plane was subjected to a thorough search; no bomb was found and later in the afternoon was allowed to take off again. Mr. Kapila arrived at 8 p.m together with two Scotland Yard detectives who had been brought over from London.

On Friday, 11th August, 1972 the accused appeared again before Mr. Justice Sauzier. Mr. A.R. Kapila and Mr. R. Valabhji appeared for him. Mr. Grimmett appeared for the Crown. Among the persons present in court was the Chief Minister, Mr. James R. Mancham.

The accused pleaded NOT GUILTY….

And the case was adjourned to the 4th September, 1972, before His Lordship Chief Justice Souyave. The trial started.

After the Attorney-General had opened the prosecution case and given the Court a summary of the evidence he meant to adduce, the first prosecution witness was called.

P.W.1 CHRISTOPHER MAURICE DAVIES

He said that he was the manager of Reef Hotel situated at Anse Aux Pins. He remembered Sunday, 13th February, 1972. He had gone to bed when he was awoken at about 1.05 a.m by the sound of an explosion. He looked out of the door of his flat and saw various persons including members of the hotel staff proceeding from the hotel car park area towards the South block of the hotel. He got dressed and went out to the scene of the explosion. It was at the extreme end of the south block of the hotel.

Mr. Davies then gave details of the damage caused and the value of the loss suffered.

In cross-examination Mr. Davis was asked:

Q. “Is the accused a person of good character?

A. Yes.

Q. And the same applies to Daphne?

A. Yes.

Q. He was held in high esteem as a security guard at the time?

A. Yes, we had nothing against him. As far as I recall he was a senior security guard from the outset.

After Mr. Davies had completed his evidence the prosecution called its second witness.

P.W.2 FERNAND BONNE

My name is Fernand Bonne. I am a security guard at the Reef Hotel. I was on duty on the evening of the 13th and morning of 14th February, 1972. Also on duty were Antoine Laporte and Eugene Jean. There were the three of us. I know Guy Pool (identifies accused). He was not on duty that evening. He was to take leave on Saturday and I was to take leave on Sunday but he asked me to change leave and the Chief of Security agreed to it. According to me he was to come back from leave on Monday at 11 p.m.

On 13th February I came to work at 11 p.m. I was at the gate until midnight and then I did my rounds. I patrolled singly. I patrolled the side facing the road first. I went round. I made a round towards the sea and then came back to the front. I made my rounds near all the rooms. After I had finished going round I believe I spoke to head porter Eugene Denis. It was about 12.45 a.m. I went towards the swimming pool. While I was there I heard an explosion. It was then about 1 or 1.05 a.m.

At the entrance I met Antoine Laporte and we went up together where I saw smoke. Smoke was coming at the very end of the hotel, the southern end. I went to where I saw the smoke. I saw many tourists standing outside. I noticed several doors had fallen on the ground.

The witness then identified some photographs showing the scene of the explosion.

In cross-examination the witness said:

The other security guards on duty that night were Antoine Laporte and Eugene Jean.

Accused was supposed to be off duty on Saturday. He was to work from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. He finished work Saturday morning at 7 a.m. and he was supposed to work on Sunday at 11 p.m. We changed leave and it was approved by the chief security guard. The accused and I are friends. We were employed at the same time we approached Dogley and we told him that we were to change leave. We saw one of the senior people. I do not know his name.

I do not know whether he was to start work on Monday at 11p.m. We had changed shifts like that several times.

The prosecution then called its third witness:

P.W.3 ANTOINE LAPORTE who said:

My name is Antoine Laporte. I am a security guard at Reef Hotel Anse Aux Pins. I was a security guard on the night of the 13th / 14th February 1972 at Reef Hotel. One Fernand Bonne and one Eugene Jean were also security guards that night. I came on duty at 11 p.m. I started beat duty, patrolling. I walked around the hotel and everywhere. I patrolled everywhere both seaside and road side of the hotel. I patrolled at the Southern end of the hotel about 20 minutes to 1 a.m. on 14th February. Everything was in order. I then came towards the northern end. I walked slowly. I reached the northern end ¼ to 1 a.m. About 1.15 a.m. I heard an explosion. I ran in the direction from which the explosion had come. I noticed pieces of broken cement blocks and broken doors on the ground. The damage was to the first floor. I stayed on the ground. Lots of people came to the scene.

I know Guy Pool. He is the accused in this case. When I was employed on 27th December I met him at the Reef Hotel. We have worked together on the same shift before. I have seen him patrolling like I do and he has seen me patrolling. He was not on duty that evening. I do not know why.

The witness then went on to identify photographs of the scene of the explosion.

The witness was then cross-examined and he stated:

I do not live too near the accused house. I would say from where I am now to Adam Moosa’s shop (estimated 100yds). I know a place called Orangine. It is not far from Reef Hotel . One has to cross a marsh from one place to the other. It is difficult for me to estimate the distance. W.&.C. French have cleared the area and it is some time since I have been there. It is difficult to say how long it would take me to walk from Reef Hotel to Orangine.

There is also a shop owner by the name of Ratnan near my house.Ratnan is dead but the shop is still there. The shop is closed. It is about 125ft. away from my house. There is a house between that shop and my house and which blocks my view of the shop. There is a house belonging to Mrs. Ratnan Pillay further away. I cannot tell how far it is from my house. I cannot tell the distance from the shop to my house. Coming to the shop from the Orangine you can approach accused house either from the left or the right. It depends from where you approach his house. From Orangine to the shop you then reach a road. At the shop you turn left to go to accused’s house.

I know where Daphne Pool lives; she lives on the Govt. low cost housing. I do not know her house but I know the area where she lives. That was where she was living on 13th /14th February 1972. When you come to the shop from Orangine you follow the road straight down to go to Daphne’s place. You would follow the road down. You take a different direction from Guy’s house. I know the house of one Moona at Anse Aux Pins, Emile Moona. His house is not between my house and the accused’s house.Moona rents a house near the seaside. He is the only Moona I know at Anse Aux Pins. I do not know the Moona you are referring to. There is one Mougnan at Anse Aux Pins. From accused’s house to the shop one passes in the direction of Mongnan’s house. It is on the other side of the road.

The witness then gave evidence of certain statements he had made to the police and in re-examination stated.

I do not know whether accused lives with his mother or on his own. I do not know whose house it is where Guy lives, whether it is his or his mother’s. I know the area where Guy lives. I do not know the house. Daphne’s house is not near the hotel. I cannot give an exact distance but her house is quite a distance away from the hotel.

The fourth prosecution witness to be called was:

P.W. 4 JEFFREY WILLIAM BIDDLE

My name is Jeffrey William Biddle. I am a retired Major. I am attached to Metropolitan Police Forensic Science Laboratory. I am an explosive officer. I have had over thirty years experience in field of explosives and ammunitions, both theoretically and practically.

I visited the Reef Hotel on 18th February, 1972. I examined the scene of structural damage which appeared to me to be consistent with a violent explosion having taken place. Mr. Biddle then went on to describe the structural details of the bedroom block affected by the explosion. He stated that he located the seat of the explosion on the first floor verandah some 12 inches from the entrance door of room 139. The witness identified the photographs of the scene of the explosion, and went on to say:

I formed the opinion that a powerful home made bomb containing an estimated 1 to 2 lbs. high effect explosive manufactured blasting gelignite type was used and was initiated by a plain aluminum detonator probably the number 6 strength and ignited by a length of slow burning safety fuse. There are many explosives. I am talking of one kind of explosive- gelignite.

Mr. Biddle then produced a number of exhibits which he collected at the scene of the explosion and certain other exhibits which were handed over to him by Superintendent David Ashford. Among these was a large jagged metal fragment measuring 5″ x 3 ¾ ″ x 1/16″ thick of cast alloy which was contaminated on the inside wall with a suspected light brown colour substance and a piece of spent safety fuse found in the area.

Mr. Biddle then went on to state:

I believe the cast alloy to be cast aluminum or zinc alloy. In trying to assess type of metal and from where it comes, a number of theories came into my mind. It could have been aluminum or zinc casing from a vehicle or something like a sea buoy. I would say it was set off by a person or persons who knew what they were doing or had done similar things before. It was a single operation. I was of the opinion that it could have been cylindrical in shape and approximately 10″ long x3″ diameter.

I handed the exhibits to Supt. Ashford and then I took them to London where I handed them to Mr. D.P. Lidstone who is a senior scientific officer E 2 (Home Office) Branch Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment Royal Arsenal Woolwich London, SE 18 and I handed those to him on 7th March 1972 for further examination and tests. I received them back from him and they have been in my possession since then.

After referring to some photographs showing scenes of the sites of explosions Mr. Biddle went on:

In my opinion any person in close vicinity of the seat of explosion at the time it occurred would have suffered serious if not fatal injuries if they were within a distance of 30-40 feet. It is difficult to pinpoint because odd fragments can travel longer. The seat of the explosion was outside room 139. A person lying down in bed could have escaped injuries.

In cross examination Mr. Biddle said:

I came here on 18th February. The report which I did before transportation of exhibits to London was completed on 2nd March. On 07th March I passed the exhibits to Mr. Lidstone. I left on the Thursday night plane which reached London on Friday. On Tuesday morning I had the first opportunity of passing the exhibits to Mr. Lidstone. The establishment was closed for the weekend.

Q. Would you expect that no metallic fragment from the detonator was found?

A. I found some suspect fragments. It was a mass of debris. I am not definitely sure and I called them suspect fragments. Mr. Lidstone is an expert in his field. I would not disagree with Mr. Lidstone’s report that no metallic fragment from the detonator was found. I did not subject the exhibits to the same tests which he did. I can assure the court that the type of explosive we have been referring to would require to be set off by a more sensitive explosive compound contained in a detonator.

Q. Your finding that it was made of aluminum was only a speculator’s finding made in absence of any fragments of detonator?

A. Yes.

Q. Would you agree the only place you have departed from your report is by adding the word “slow burning” before “safety fuse” on last page?

A. Correct.

Q. Why have you departed from your report in that respect?

A. Safety fuse is a slow burning fuse and those two words can be withdrawn. Rate of burning of this type of safety fuse is 2ft. per minute. This is a known fact. There was a sparsity of fragments of fuse and I agree that it relates to a relatively short length of fuse used. If one was conscious and one light a piece of safety fuse to set off an explosive and used 12ft of it, one would have to get a long way from it before it went off. If one was bold and familiar with use of this type of material he could cut off a matter of inches, 6″ or 4″ but he would have to ensure to find a protective covering. The length of safety fuse used here could have been 12″ long. When the explosive goes off, it can, because of the way it’s been laid, attach position or coiled but when explosion occurs it can be consumed in the explosion so that there’s little or nothing left. If there had been a 12″ long fuse I would have expected to find more. The fragment suggest the use of a relatively short length of fuse, 8″or 9″ or some number of inches.

Supt. Ashford was most helpful in the investigation as far as I had something to do with him. I have not had a copy of Mr. Lidstone’s report. (shown copy of report) I did receive a copy of that report. It was sent to my office as part of a normal procedure. My report was prepared typed and left here before I left on the second occasion. That was mid March. It was at the end of the week of the queen’s visit to Seychelles.

Q. At end of July when accused was arrested the C.I.D. here knew exactly the type of casing and fuse which this particular bomb was made of?

A. In my opinion yes.

Q. What is the purpose of a detonator?

A. A plain detonator is a manufactured explosive store designed to initiate an explosive charge of gelignite. To set off an explosive you must have explosive charge which due to statutory regulation for manufacture is produced in a stable form to allow transportation, handling storage etc. in a safe way. To ignite or set off that charge you must have a manufactured type detonator. A plain one has to be initiated by a slow burning safety fuse inserted in detonator which is gripped so that it does not slip off. The detonator with the fuse is inserted in the explosive. The lighted fuse sets off the detonator. The normal manufacturer detonator is made of aluminium casing. The fuse could be as short as 12″.

Q. Had the 12″ inch fuse been thrown onto the balcony could the person have got away in time?

A. Yes. If it was longer he’d have had a better chance of getting away.

By Court

The stairway was about 30ft. from the seat of the explosion. The staircase is just behind the stone wall on right side of f the wall.