The family of Adrianna Young, through their lawyer, have asked a second autopsy of the body. From what has been published in the press, there was no reason given for the request. Surely, after an autopsy conducted by three prominent pathologists, the authorities should be given an explanation as to why a second autopsy is required. It could be that the family believes that an error was made, a conclusion was incorrect, a finding was not supported by the investigations, or something else was amiss. Whatever the reason, if the support of the Minister of Health is sought, surely the reason for the request needs to be given. I presume that the permission of the Minister of Health is necessary for an official autopsy, that is, one that is required to be taken into consideration by the Police in their investigations. That could be the reason for the request made to the Minister. It could also be that his permission is required for use of the Ministry’s facilities.
The Minister responded that the child’s body is out of the Ministry’s control and has been handed over to the family. It seems a bit too much to ask the Government to conduct another autopsy after the family was given the opportunity of having present a pathologist of their choice whose qualifications and expertise they have hailed and have since made no official complaints about the findings that are so far known. I do not know if there is any reason why the family cannot conduct a private autopsy, using private facilities and then requesting the Police to take it into account in their investigations. If this is possible, the Minister may wish to consider inviting the family to take this path.
The circumstances surrounding the death of Adrianna Younge still give rise to controversy. There are some who believe that her death can be explained by the facts that are public knowledge. It is argued that the reason why her body was not seen in the pool was that at a certain depth an object, such as a body, at the bottom, is not visible. There are others who believe that Adrianna did not drown in the pool but somewhere in the hotel and later placed in the pool. Since no rational motive for that act can be found, it is alleged that the child was killed as “a blood sacrifice,” what ever that is. Still others believe that the conclusion of the autopsy finding that Adrianna died by drowning is not true, not that the pathologists lied, but that they were wrong. These views are not really surprising having regard to the circumstances that emerged, or alleged to have emerged, immediately after Adrianna was reported missing. The false Police report stands out as the most egregious. It sent the Police on a wild goose chase and may have initially given the relatives some hope. It is also alleged that the efforts of the police were half-hearted, that the search of the hotel was inadequate, and that the hotel staff was uncooperative. Fire was set to the hotel. Some believe that the evidence shows that the owner was responsible so that evidence of the killing could be destroyed. Immediately after the owner’s home was destroyed by arson. No allegation was made against the owner for burning down his own home as he allegedly did to his own hotel to hide his murdering a child, or his complicity therein.
Crowds gathered in various places in the city and elsewhere, especially on the day the autopsy was held. Had the Police intervened by attempting to remove the crowd unless it had become absolutely necessary, they would have been castigated. As it turned out, the crowd became unruly and were eventually dispersed. But criminal elements took advantage of the heightened tension and blocked roadways, set fires, obstructed traffic, burnt, looted, and created terror in Georgetown and parts of the country. Somewhere in the vicinity of twenty supermarkets, owned by Chinese nationals, were looted and damaged and events, including international events, due to be held, have been postponed. The underbelly of Guyana’s carefully cultivated image of a burgeoning oil economy with massive infrastructural and social development, has been unexpectedly exposed by the existence of groups in the society with criminal intent.
The Opposition has been very active in supporting the family of Adrianna Younge. They have also launched a campaign against the Police Force in general, calling for the resignation of the Commissioner, a commission of enquiry, civilian oversight of the Polcie Force and other reforms. Whether these will happen in the absence of an overall political solution in Guyana is doubtful. But more immediately, the calls for overseas assistance in the current police investigations are relevant. While I very much doubt that foreign police authorities will undertake investigatory work in Guyana, or any other country outside their own for that matter, they may well be prepared to act in an advisory capacity. The Government may find that obtaining such assistance will do much to allay fears and suspicions about the capacity or willingness of the Police. This matter needs to be brought to an end as soon as possible.