— Differing accounts of alleged phone call, movements and knowledge of Narine’s residence invite scrutiny
Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed is facing fresh scrutiny over his conflicting accounts of his movements on the night of a shooting incident near the residence of Senior Superintendent of Police Prem Narine, a key witness in his extradition proceedings, raising questions about the explanation he has provided for being in the area.
In separate public statements on Friday and Sunday, Mohamed gave different versions of where he was when he allegedly received information about an incident at Rama Krishna Primary School, which he cited as the reason for travelling into the area.
The differences have also prompted questions about whether the alleged telephone call can be independently verified and whether it explains his presence near Narine’s residence.
Speaking on Friday, shortly after his release on bail, Mohamed claimed he was at home when two parents contacted him about an incident involving their children.
“Two parents from Rama Krishna Primary School called me the same night when we were sitting at the back of my yard. And the parents said that a school gate fell on their children, a six-year-old and a seven-year-old,” Mohamed said.
However, during a live broadcast on Sunday, Mohamed offered a different account, claiming he was travelling from Parika to Georgetown when he received the information.
“Let me tell you exactly what happened the night of the failed assassination attempt. You may recall we were at Parika earlier that night. The vehicle wheels were clamped and police carried out a search for guns and ammunition. … We left Parika, on the way to Georgetown, I received information about an incident at Rama Krishna Primary,” he said.
The two statements differ on a central detail of Mohamed’s explanation.
On Friday, Mohamed said he was sitting at the back of his yard when the parents called. By Sunday, he said he received the information while travelling from Parika to Georgetown.
The discrepancy raises questions about the sequence of events leading to his presence on Barr Street, where Narine resides.
Further questions arise from his descriptions of what happened after he and his driver, identified as Eugene, allegedly decided against visiting Rama Krishna Primary School.
On Friday, Mohamed acknowledged taking out his cellphone and recording video as the vehicle travelled back along Barr Street.
“On our way, Eugene told me, ‘Let’s not go to the school,’ and I agreed. When we headed back out, I took out my phone and recorded a video,” he said.
Mohamed said he recorded two police vehicles parked along the left side of Barr Street, heading toward Vlissengen Road, outside Narine’s residence.
However, during Sunday’s broadcast, Mohamed emphasised that his vehicle travelled at a normal speed and did not stop to take photographs.
“We drove back along Barr Street, a public road, not slowly, but at a regular pace. We did not stop to take pictures,” he said.
Another difference concerns Mohamed’s stated knowledge of Narine’s residence.
On Friday, Mohamed insisted he did not know whether the senior police officer lived on the left or right side of Barr Street.
Yet during Sunday’s broadcast, Mohamed stated that Narine lived in a back house.
The additional detail raises questions about when Mohamed learned the location of Narine’s residence and what he knew about the property on the night of the shooting.
Mohamed and two associates have since appeared in court on firearm, ammunition charged for a gun found in their vehicle with the serial number filed off and obstruction-related charges.