Report of the Duffus Commission of Inquiry into the Breakdown of Law & Order, and Police Brutality in Grenada

Part III

The Events of November 18, 1973

Paragraphs 115 thru 116. - An Examination in Detail [Part 21] - The Evidence of Innocent Belmar

115. Asst. Supt. Belmar tried to convey the impression that he had not visited the Grenville police station before the afternoon of Sunday, November 18 and that he had been at his home at Birchgrove before he left for St. George's; that it was on his way back to his house at Birchgrove that he learned he was likely to be ambushed; that he eluded the Six members of the New Jewel Movement who were pursuing him; that he knew nothing about a meeting at Grenville and that the police activity in Grenville was wholly the result of a telecommunication contact he made with Inspector David Andrews at 3:00 p.m. (15:00) that afternoon.

If in fact he believed that the Grenville police station was to be attacked that Sunday, then he was singularly negligent by his [missing words here] on the other hand he learned of the businessmen's meeting and intended to prevent it from being held, then the credible evidence of his activity that day fully explains the sequence of the measures he adopted to achieve his purpose.

It is recorded in the police station diary for St.David that at 8:28 a.m. on that morning he left the St. David police station by car with some men. He was seen at the Grenville police station about 9 - 9:30 a.m. that morning recruiting police aides. He went to a meeting in St. George's and left that city about 2:30 p.m. (14:30) that day.

The evidence of the Minister of National Security implies, however, that Belmar was expected to be in Grenville that afternoon and not Birchgrove. Be that as it may, it is revealing to learn what Belmar meant when he spoke about the likelihood of being ambushed.

Q. Now when you speak, in fact, Mr. Belmar, of lying in ambush in Grand Etang to see us passing - that word ambush has me a little concerned.
A. I can explain it for you if you like.
Q. Yes, I would very much like to hear what you have to say.
A. When I parked my car, I came out of my car, and I went as close as possible to the main road. That is to say if any vehicle of you all did pass, you all could not have seen me. I was completely out of sight. That's what I mean.
Q. That's what you mean by ambush.
A. Yes.

116. in order to maintain his position regarding the events of Sunday, November 18, 1973, and Monday, November 19, 1973, Belmar chose to assert or otherwise to imply that the following witnesses told untruthful evidence.

  1. Rev. Fr. Coxhead
  2. Rupert Bishop (deceased)
  3. Mrs. Sylvia Radix
  4. Dr. Lawrence Gibbs
  5. Ben Jones
  6. Lennie Archibald
  7. H.M. Bhola
  8. Simon Daniel
  9. Commissioner of Police (ag.) Nugent David
  10. Cpl. 190 Simon
  11. Anthony Waldron
  12. Emmanuel John
  13. Ann Alexander
  14. Cosmos Nurse
  15. David Andrews
It is not necessary to examine in detail his allegations or imputations of untruthfulness against each of the abovenamed although the manner in which he dealt with some of them is illustrative of his attitude, his temperament and his mentality.

It was suggested to him several times that he arrived at the Grenville police station about the same time as Radix, Austin and Daniel. Belmar denied this on every occasion and insisted that he did not go to the station at any time until about 1 1/2 hours to 2 hours after the three of them had been taken there.

The record of the station diary showed that he was not speaking the truth about his and that the suggestion was accurate; the diary shows that Belmar was noted as having arrived 12 minutes after Radix, Austin and Daniel.

He asserted that the Six detainees were charged about 8:00 p.m. (20:00) on November 18 for various offences; he denied the suggestion that the detainees were first informed of the charges only on Monday morning November 19, 1973. The station diary disclosed that the charges were not recorded until the early morning of Monday, November 19, 1973.

He asserted that the evidence of Fr. Coxhead and Dr. Gibbs was not correct, and implied that they both had lied about his being informed that Dr. Gibbs had been brought to see one of the detainees who was injured.

About Ben Jones and Lennie Archibald he said he was not surprised by their evidence because they had both been victims of police searches and had therefore "put their heads together to come here and fabricate before this Commission of Inquiry."

About Mrs. Radix his opinion was that "her son was arrested, and I don't expect better from her."

He said the same also about the late Rupert Bishop.

Back: Duffus 114      Next: Duffus 117      Duffus Contents     Home Page: Index