Ex-inmate awarded $140k for prison beating

A former inmate who claimed he was severely beaten by prison officers and inmates while serving a 22-day sentence at the Golden Grove Prison in May 2017 will receive $140,000 in compensation.

“This type of behaviour must stop,” Justice Ricky Rahim said as he upheld Randell Ramoutar's assault and battery claim.

Ramoutar claimed he was assaulted on three consecutive days —May 26, 27, and 28—shortly after being remanded in connection with a housebreaking charge. He said he was first attacked by a group of officers upon arrival at the prison, beaten with batons, and later assaulted by inmates in the presence of a laughing officer.

Ramoutar alleged the attacks continued over the next two days, with repeated threats and demands about missing money. He sustained fractures to both hands and has since struggled with grip strength, pain, and psychological trauma. Two unchallenged medical reports confirmed the injuries, including a deformity in the alignment of one finger and an estimated eight per cent permanent disability.

Ramoutar also claimed that a senior officer discouraged him from reporting the assaults, warning that it would cause "more problems."

Under cross-examination, he admitted he could not identify the specific officers involved due to the nature of the beatings. He also acknowledged that he did not report the assaults immediately or seek medical care until a week after his release.

In response, the State denied the claims. Superintendent Terry Joseph testified that no complaints or requests for medical treatment were logged during Ramoutar’s detention. He said official records showed routine activities and no reported incidents on the relevant dates.

However, he admitted that some records were missing and that no officers had been called to testify. He also confirmed the allegation surfaced three years after the incident and that attempts to identify the officers were hindered by lost logs during a 2020 prison riot.

The State claimed Ramoutar fabricated the entire story to obtain money from the State, as suggested during cross-examination. However, Rahim rejected this, concluding that Ramoutar’s detailed testimony showed he was reliving genuine trauma. Rahim believed his account of crouching in a corner to shield himself from blows was credible and supported by medical evidence of injuries consistent with baton strikes.

“It is absolutely incredible, in the view of the court, that Randell would go into such detail about the incident, if he was making it all up.”

The court accepted that Ramoutar was targeted due to a connection with an alleged break-in in South Trinidad, even though it was unclear if Julien was a prison officer. Rahim noted that prison officers are legally required to report such incidents, but it was unreasonable to expect them to report assaults they committed themselves, explaining the lack of official reports.

“This is the sad reality of the life behind prison walls and these courts have spoken time and time again on this issue through its judgments.”

Rahim also noted that Joseph was not present during the incidents and relied on records, but the defence’s failure to call officers on duty that day led the court to draw an adverse inference against them. The court believed Ramoutar’s testimony that he suffered intense pain and called for help, but no assistance came, reflecting the harsh reality inside prisons.

“The court believes the claimant when he testified that he was in tremendous pain and called out for help several times from the cell and that no one came to his assistance. Again, this is the reality of prison existence where fellow inmates are reluctant to intervene and for very good reason.”

Overall, Rahim rejected the defence’s suggestion that Ramoutar fabricated his injuries or story and found he was brutally assaulted by state officers despite being presumed innocent at the time. He also condemned such inhumane treatment in prisons and deemed it deserving of exemplary damages.

“At the time, he was not serving a sentence but was being kept, so as to be returned to court but the officers thought it best to enact their own form of revenge on him for an act for which he was presumed innocent. The nature and extent of the injury to his hands support Randell, as scientific evidence usually speaks the truth.”

Regarding damages, the State’s submission that damages should be low due to limited and outdated medical evidence was dismissed. Rahim relied on the existing medical reports showing permanent partial disability and lasting effects, finding them clear and compelling. He also increased the award for aggravation.

“The courts of this country have cautioned time and time again that such inhumanity has no place within our prison system, regardless of what inmates have been accused of outside of the prisons.

“Some writers have even advocated for those who are responsible for such actions to be made personally liable for damages instead of the tax-paying public.

“This court makes no comment thereon but does find that the barbaric nature of the attack and clandestine suppression of the incident is deserving of an award of exemplary damages for the wanton breaches of the rights of the claimant.”

Rahim labelled the prison officer’s conduct as “oppressive and outrageous.”