Shooting outside the extradition witness’ home: Mother of arrested cop hands over $300k as second rank implicated in video leak

The Guyana Police Force has defended the detention of Police Constable, Ryan Greene and his mother, Nikita Greene, in connection with an investigation into the alleged unauthorised downloading and removal of surveillance footage from the Government’s Safe Country programme.

In an affidavit filed in the High Court on Wednesday, Cadet Officer Stephan Hinds, who is attached to the Criminal Investigation Department’s Major Crime Investigations Unit, said the two remained in lawful custody while investigations continued into the matter.

The affidavit was filed in response to a fixed-date application brought by Randy Greene, the father of Ryan Greene and husband of Nikita Greene, seeking their release from police custody.

The application asks the court to issue a writ of habeas corpus requiring the police to produce the detained persons before the court and explain the legal basis for their detention. It also seeks their immediate release or, alternatively, their release under conditions set by the court.

Hinds stated that Ryan Greene, a constable stationed at the Safe Country programme’s Command Centre at Liliendaal, was arrested on October 26 after police informed him of the allegation and cautioned him.

According to the affidavit, Ryan Greene subsequently gave a recorded confession in which he allegedly admitted downloading surveillance data from the Command Centre covering the night of October 23 into the morning of October 24.

The affidavit further alleges that he transferred the data to a flash drive and delivered it to United States-sanctioned and indicted Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed at his Houston, Greater Georgetown, home.

Hinds said Ryan Greene allegedly told investigators that Mohamed reviewed the contents of the flash drive and asked how much he wanted for it. The constable allegedly said he requested $800,000, which was subsequently paid in cash by Eugene Thorne, an associate of Mohamed, on Mohamed’s instructions and in his presence.

The affidavit states that the data belongs to the State and is likely to have evidential value in several criminal charges previously instituted against Mohamed, Thorne and Mario Mohamed.

Hinds further stated that, following another recorded confession, Ryan Greene led police to his home at Guyhoc Park, Georgetown, where officers contacted his mother.

According to the affidavit, police informed Nikita Greene of the reason for their visit, and she handed over $300,000.

Another rank implicated

The police further alleged that another member of the Force stationed at the Command Centre may have been involved in the unauthorised downloading and removal of the data. Hinds said investigations were continuing and that the file would be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions for advice when the investigations were completed.

The affidavit states that, based on advice received from the Police Legal Advisor and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, several serious criminal offences may have been committed by Ryan Greene and Nikita Greene.

Hinds, relying on advice from the Attorney General’s Chambers, maintained that the arrests were made on sufficient reasonable grounds and that the detention was authorised by Article 139 of the Constitution.

He described the habeas corpus proceedings as premature and without merit and asked the court to dismiss the application with costs.

Applicant challenges legality of detention

In the fixed-date application, Randy Greene challenged the legality of the arrests and detention, arguing that the allegation of “conspiracy to commit felony” was not accompanied by the identification of a specific felony known to the law of Guyana.

The application also contends that the police failed to inform Ryan Greene and Nikita Greene of the true reasons for their arrests, contrary to Article 139(3) of the Constitution.

It further argues that Ryan Greene’s arrest and detention over the alleged copying and communication of surveillance footage relating to an October 12, 2026, incident involving Mohamed and members of the police raise constitutional concerns.

According to the application, Mohamed and two members of his staff, Thorne and Mario Mohamed, were arrested and charged following the incident. The application sets out competing accounts of the encounter, including the State’s position that shots were fired from the vehicle in which Mohamed was travelling and that an unlicensed firearm was found in it, while Mohamed has maintained that shots were fired at his vehicle and that the firearm was planted.

The applicant argues that the footage raises questions about the conduct of police ranks during the encounter and the handling of evidence relevant to the pending criminal proceedings.

The application also challenges the police’s public disclosure of Ryan Greene’s purported admissions before any charge was laid, arguing that this was inconsistent with the presumption of innocence and the protection of the law under Article 144 of the Constitution.

Among the reliefs sought are declarations that the arrests and detention were unlawful, directions concerning a claim for compensation, damages and legal costs.

The police have asked the court to dismiss the application, maintaining that the detention is lawful while investigations continue.