The father of Police Constable Ryan Greene has asked the High Court to order the release of his son and wife, challenging their detention in an investigation into an alleged $800,000 payment for surveillance footage involving Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed.
Randy Greene, a sound engineer, brought the application on behalf of his 20-year-old son and his wife, Nikita Greene, 39. The Commissioner of Police and the Attorney General are named as respondents.
In an affidavit sworn on October 28, Greene said both were arrested on October 26 and were being held at the Criminal Investigation Department headquarters on Vlissengen Road.
He said neither had been charged or taken before a court at the time of his affidavit.
“Every hour of their detention is a continuing deprivation of their liberty,” Greene stated, asking the court to grant a writ of habeas corpus and order their release.
The application was prepared by attorney Darren Wade.
Ryan Greene, who is attached to the Police Force’s Command Centre, is accused of receiving money in exchange for footage of the October 12 shooting incident outside Senior Superintendent Prem Narine’s Barr Street, Kitty home.
According to the affidavit’s account of an October 26 police statement, investigators alleged that the constable admitted receiving $800,000 and giving part of the money to his mother. Police also indicated that efforts were underway to recover the money and that several possible offences were being investigated.
The father’s application challenges the basis for holding both relatives. He said Wade contacted police on October 26 and was told they were detained for “conspiracy to commit felony”, but the officer could not identify the felony they were alleged to have conspired to commit.
The affidavit argues that police must identify a specific offence to justify the detention.
Greene also disputed the basis for his wife’s arrest, saying the only allegation against her, as he understood it, was that she received money from their son. He did not admit that allegation and maintained that she had no involvement with the footage.
“She had no part in anything concerning the footage,” he stated.
The application further challenges possible reliance on the Cybercrime Act. Without admitting that Ryan accessed or disclosed the recordings, it argues that his assignment to the Command Centre gave him authorised access and that disclosure could have been justified by the material’s relevance to pending criminal proceedings.
Greene also contends that the investigation could continue with his son and wife at liberty. He argues that the police’s publication of an alleged admission before any charge prejudiced his son’s presumption of innocence.
The footage concerns the incident that led to the arrest of Mohamed and two associates, Eugene Thorne and Mario Mohamed, who subsequently faced charges.
Police had reported that Narine heard what appeared to be a gunshot as a vehicle approached his residence and discharged his service weapon towards it. Investigators also reported recovering a firearm from the vehicle.
Mohamed has disputed the police account and alleged that the weapon was planted. The affidavit refers to those competing accounts and argues that footage publicly shown by Mohamed on October 26 raises questions about the official version.
Attorney General Anil Nandlall, SC, has separately described the alleged payment for the footage as evidence tampering, arguing that relevant recordings should be sought through court disclosure procedures.
Mohamed’s attorney, Damien DaSilva, has said his client received videos from several sources, including senior police officers, and did not know the constable allegedly involved.
