The Home Affairs Ministry has called for a comprehensive review of access controls, personnel and procedures at the Guyana Police Force (GPF) Command Centre at Liliendaal following the alleged unauthorised access, extraction and disclosure of police surveillance footage. The Ministry, in a statement on Monday, said the breach was a matter of concern to both the Ministry and the national security services, noting that it could affect the confidentiality of law enforcement operations.

The matter is currently under police investigation. “The matter is now under police investigation, which must proceed on the evidence and in accordance with the law,” the Ministry said, adding that political office does not confer immunity from investigation and political affiliation cannot be a basis for prosecution.
The statement came another police rank, this time Police Constable Ashton Chappelle, 24, was charged under the Cybercrime Act in connection with the alleged downloading and transfer of surveillance footage from the GPF Command Centre. Chappelle, also known as “Chappy”, of Non Pariel, East Coast Demerara (ECD), appeared at the Sparendaam Magistrates’ Courts on Monday before Magistrate Abigail Gibbs, where he was charged with obtaining and giving electronic data relating to the national security of the State, contrary to Section 9(1)(b) and Section 9(2)(b) of the Cybercrime Act No. 16 of 2018.
The alleged offence occurred on October 24, 2026. Chappelle was arrested on Friday and charged on Monday. Bail was refused and he was remanded to prison. The matter will continue on November 24. His name surfaced during High Court proceedings last week involving United States (US)-sanctioned and indicted Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed and Police Constable Ryan Greene, who are facing a separate but related Cybercrime Act charge concerning the alleged unauthorised release of police surveillance footage. During a habeas corpus application filed by Mohamed’s attorneys, Attorney General (AG) Anil Nandlall, SC, told the High Court that Chappelle had been implicated in the investigation.
According to the disclosure, investigators allege that Chappelle admitted to downloading surveillance recordings from the GPF Command Centre, transferring them to a flash drive and handing the device to Greene.
The recordings reportedly relate to the October 12 shooting outside the Kitty, Georgetown, residence of Senior Superintendent of Police Prem Narine, Head of the Special Branch Unit and a witness in the extradition proceedings involving Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed. Greene, 20, of Guyhoc Park, Georgetown, and Mohamed, 39, of Houston, Greater Georgetown, were previously charged with unauthorised granting of access to or giving of electronic data, contrary to Section 9 of the Cybercrime Act. The prosecution alleges that Greene, who was attached to the Police Command Centre, obtained the surveillance recordings and supplied them to Mohamed in exchange for $800,000. The alleged transaction is said to have occurred on October 24.
Both Greene and Mohamed appeared before Magistrate Gibbs at the Sparendaam Magistrates’ Courts on Friday and were denied bail. They were remanded to prison, with the matters set to continue on November 24.
During the bail hearing, Prosecutor King’s Counsel Darshan Ramdhani said investigators were pursuing additional evidence, including communication records between Mohamed and Greene, while efforts were also being made to locate Mohamed’s driver, Eugene Thorne. Ramdhani told the court that the prosecution’s case was supported by statements from Greene and other police ranks, as well as video footage which allegedly captured the extraction of data from the Police Command Centre. The prosecution maintained its objection to bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations and the ongoing investigation into possible additional offences.
Unauthorised handling
Against this background, the Home Affairs Ministry said any conduct involving the unauthorised handling of sensitive information, if established, could compromise investigations, affect operational security and interfere with the administration of justice.
The Ministry said the situation also raised questions about compliance with standard operating procedures at the Command Centre and the safeguards in place to protect sensitive information. It has called for a review to determine the extent of the alleged breach and identify any failures in conduct or oversight.
The review is expected to examine personnel, access controls, supervisory arrangements and operational procedures at the facility. According to the Ministry, the findings will be used to strengthen security controls, improve supervision, enforce procedures and adopt measures to better protect sensitive information. The findings will also inform possible legislative reform.
The surveillance footage investigation stems from the wider probe into the October 12 shooting outside Narine’s residence. Mohamed, Thorne and videographer Mario Mohamed have separately been charged with unlawful possession of a .32 Taurus pistol and three rounds of ammunition without valid licences, as well as attempting to obstruct the course of justice. They have pleaded not guilty and were each granted $750,000 bail.
Mohamed and his father, Nazar Mohamed, were sanctioned by the US Department of the Treasury in 2024 and are wanted in the US to face an 11-count indictment involving allegations of fraud, money laundering and other offences linked to an alleged gold-export scheme. Both men deny the allegations and are contesting their extradition proceedings.

Source: Guyana Times

Sanction Man’s family combine – who we’ve now seen actually runs the WIN party!! – is complaining bitterly (as usual!!) in their now familiar gaslighting of the government and the institutions of the state!! This time it’s about the Magistrate Court and the prison service – after their “boddy” deliberately broke the law in his desperation to evade extradition and that orange jump-suit in Miami!!
On the Magistrate, they’re kvetching that she’s knuckled under to political pressure for not granting bail to Sanction Man – ignoring the fact that the selfsame magistrate has been accused just as bitterly for supposedly denying the Govt’s wishes that Seeram be given bail on his wife-beating charges!! When you are cussed out by partisans of both sides your Eyewitness thinks the young magistrate is doing the right thing!!
After all, in England that’s supposed to be setting legal precedents for us, the court may remand an accused in custody if there are substantial grounds to believe they’d fail to attend court; commit further offences or interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct justice!! Hasn’t sanction Man PROVEN he’s guilty of violating that last two??! And anyway…the bail question was to be settled after the weekend, no??
But it was on the “prison conditions” that WIN’s Political Director went ga gas as she painted a picture of Gulag-like conditions at Lusignan Prison!! Never mind Sanction Man’s mother and two sisters were permitted to visit; they could provide home-cooked meals and his fan was adjusted to his liking!! Poor baby…seems that silk sheets were denied!!
Maybe somebody forgot to tell the prison authorities that the LOO travels with certain lifestyle expectations and they weren’t supposed to prepare a cell but a presidential suite!!!! Your Eyewitness can just imagine the complaint form – no concierge, inadequate wardrobe space, and absolutely nowhere suitable to display the designer slippers!! Somebody better call Amnesty – and perhaps an interior decorator!!
Now, let’s be clear – every prisoner deserves humane conditions, sanitation, medical care – Hana claimed Sanction Man had a medical crisis – and access to lawyers!! If those standards are breached, demand remedies!! But the constitutional entitlement to dignity has yet to acquire a luxury upgrade for people accustomed to better upholstery!!
The family’s outrage would carry more weight if it developed into a campaign for decent conditions for all prisoners – including the policeman who Sanction Man bribed!! Plenty ordinary Guyanese families have complaints too but they simply can’t whip up without the publicity entourage carrying bullhorns!! By all means, challenge the remand through the courts – but “gulag” is doing rather heavy lifting here!!
A prison can’t be criticized like a disappointing boutique hotel – “One star. Staff declined to recognise our status!!”

…electricity costs?
Former President Donald Ramotar’s proposal to generate electricity from our uranium deserves consideration. But your Eyewitness feels declaring nuclear power our “most viable” option gets ahead of both the engineering and the arithmetic!! A recent commercial uranium enrichment facility carries an estimated US$5 billion price tag. Then comes the cost of the nuclear reactor where Canada’s first 300-megawatt D small modular reactor, including shared infrastructure, is budgeted at C$7.7 billion!!
The technical demands are equally formidable – nuclear engineers, licensed operators, radiation protection specialists, an independent regulator, emergency planning, secure fuel arrangements, radioactive waste management and eventual decommissioning!! Against that background, our challenged bringing the Wales gas-fired project into service should encourage institutional humility!!
The recommendation is straightforward but learning from our experience the former president should put together an independent comparative feasibility study, including financing, staffing, timelines and lifetime electricity costs. Uranium underground is an asset – affordable nuclear electricity is an undertaking!!
Before promising an atomic solution, let’s demonstrate we can deliver the gas-fired one first!!

…cholesterol
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in Guyana and is increasingly affecting ever-younger persons!! The surge is closely tied to increased cholesterol and obesity.
So your Eyewitness marveled at the excitement of the KFC opening in Berbice!!

Source: Guyana Times

Dear Editor,
What exactly should a magistrate do differently because the person standing before the court is the Leader of the Opposition?
That question sits at the centre of the criticism directed at Magistrate Abigail Gibbs following her decision to refuse bail to Azruddin Mohamed.
If the answer is that his political standing should have secured his release, then those advancing that argument are demanding preferential treatment.
An ordinary citizen cannot arrive at court with supporters and expect their enthusiasm to determine the outcome. Neither should a politician. Public popularity is no substitute for a legal argument, and political office cannot become an exemption from decisions other defendants must face.
I support Magistrate Gibbs’s willingness to make a decision that would predictably attract controversy. She heard both sides and explained her concern about the likelihood of further offending. Her reasoning can be challenged through the courts. Her refusal to deliver the outcome his supporters wanted does not establish misconduct.
There is a requirement needed from the politically powerful and that is the acceptance that the courts may make decisions against them.
Those who speak so loudly about justice should consider what their demands would mean for the citizen without a political party, a public platform or an army of fake online defenders. Would that person deserve the same treatment they are demanding for Mr. Mohamed?
The credibility of our justice system depends on that answer being yes.
Magistrate Gibbs should not be vilified for declining to create a special lane through the courts for a political leader.

Yours faithfully
Ayinde Sampson

Source: Guyana Times

Dear Editor,
Fourteen months after the 1 September 2025 election, and more than nine months into his tenure as Leader of the Opposition, Azruddin Mohamed has answered the question of why he entered politics. Not his critics. His record. There has been only one cause, and it is his own.
The facts need little elaboration. In June 2024, the US Treasury sanctioned him and his father, Nazar Mohamed, under the Global Magnitsky framework for public corruption and the alleged evasion of more than US$50 million in duties on gold exports. Within a year, he had launched WIN. Within weeks of the election, a federal grand jury in Florida had indicted both men on eleven counts, including wire fraud and money laundering. On 31 October 2025, they were arrested on a US extradition request. In January 2026, he became Leader of the Opposition and declared the Government “afraid of me.” His reply to the National Budget was a headline, not an alternative. Nine months later, there is still no costed programme. The only programme on offer is his own defence.
Since then, his energy has gone into the courts, not the National Assembly: the Caribbean Court of Justice, the Court of Appeal and a constitutional challenge to the Fugitive Offenders Act. Even PNCR leader Aubrey Norton has made clear that his party will not join any fight to shield him from surrender to the United States. Then came October. Shots were fired outside the Kitty home of Senior Superintendent Prem Narine, the key witness in the extradition case. Mr Mohamed calls it an assassination attempt; the police dispute that account. He and two staff members were charged with firearm offences and with attempting to obstruct the course of justice. Days later, police alleged that a constable had sold him surveillance footage of that night for $800,000. He played it at a press conference. On 30 October, he was remanded to prison on a cybercrime charge.
Magistrate Abigail Gibbs refused bail on grounds any first-year law student would recognise. Under the Bail Act 2022, she weighed a simple fact: Mr Mohamed was already on bail in his other matters and now stood accused of a fresh offence allegedly committed while on bail. She found a likelihood that further offences could follow. That is not persecution. That is the law doing its job, applied to an accused who, on the prosecution’s case, keeps adding to his own charge sheet.
His apologists did not answer with law. They answered with a smear campaign. Photographs of Magistrate Gibbs and a person said to be her partner were circulated, laced with insinuations of a quid pro quo and not a shred of evidence. Attorney Selwyn Pieters was compelled to plead publicly for the posts to come down: such allegations belong before the Judicial Service Commission, not on social media. Mr Mohamed’s lawyers had already announced appeals to three courts. The remedy lay in the law. The trolling was about intimidation.
Now consider Chief Magistrate Judy Latchman, who presides over the extradition hearing. It opened on 6 January 2026. Ten months on, only two prosecution witnesses have testified, and both remain under cross-examination. The prosecution calls it “a masterclass in delay”; the Chief Magistrate says “rushed justice is crushed justice.” Not a word from the apologists. Their standard is transparent: a magistrate is independent when she grants time and compromised when she refuses bail. That is not judicial independence. It is a scorecard.
The State has three arms, and the judiciary is no appendage of the executive. No family knows this better than the Mohameds. On 2 July 2026, Justice Gino Persaud quashed some $800 million in taxes the Guyana Revenue Authority had imposed on his sister Hana and on Bibi Mohamed over a Ferrari and a Rolls-Royce, branding the Commissioner General’s conduct “unreasonable, arbitrary, irrational, unfair, and unlawful.” On 29 October, the High Court freed the constable’s mother because the State could not justify her detention. These are the courts the family now calls captured. No one gets to celebrate the judiciary in July and vilify it in October.
Then there is Constable Ryan Greene, twenty years old and remanded to prison on the same charge. Police allege the $800,000 that bought the footage was delivered on Mr Mohamed’s behalf. The constable’s mother was detained over part of that money until the High Court ordered her release. His father, Randy Greene, was left to fight for them alone. And what did the Mohamed camp offer this family? His attorney said Mr Mohamed “does not know this young man.” His sister, Hana Mohamed, confronted by the family, was caught on video putting it more plainly: “collateral damage.”

Remember those two words. They are the most honest thing the Mohamed camp has said all year. A young man’s liberty and career in the balance, a mother detained, a father fighting in court alone, all written off as the price of one man’s defence. Mr Mohamed has senior counsel and appeals in three courts. The constable has no one but his family. That is the moral arithmetic of this Opposition: one man is the cause, and everyone else is collateral damage.
The last Opposition lived in the courts too. The difference is whom it went there for. When the Granger administration revoked the leases of West Berbice rice farmers, PPP counsel stood with them, and the High Court struck the revocations down. When the US$18 million ExxonMobil signing bonus surfaced in an undisclosed account at the Bank of Guyana, the PPP went to court to have it paid into the Consolidated Fund, and the money was moved. When the Government tried to outlast a no-confidence motion, the PPP went to the Caribbean Court of Justice and won. Farmers’ land. The public purse. The Constitution. Every case served someone other than the litigant. Today’s version has exactly one client.
The same selectivity runs through the family’s public advocacy. His sister, Hadiyyah Mohamed, wrote a master’s dissertation in political science on alleged corruption under the PPP, a work that leans on opinion and perception rather than adjudicated fact. Yet the gravest international corruption case ever to involve Guyanese nationals sits within her own family: US Treasury sanctions on her father and brother, and the designation of Hadi’s World, a company that bears her name. Scholarship that interrogates everyone except one’s own household is not scholarship. It is advocacy with footnotes.
Strip away the slogans and the matter is plain. The allegations against the Mohameds were not manufactured at Freedom House or State House. They come from the US Treasury, the US Department of Justice and a federal grand jury in Florida. The Guyana Revenue Authority even withdrew its own local charges because they overlapped with the US case. Guyana’s role is narrow: honour its treaty obligations and let its courts decide. This is not Opposition versus Government. It is a family fighting for its own freedom from alleged crimes that Washington, not Georgetown, wants to try.
The constable is not the only casualty. The Leader of the Opposition holds a constitutional office, and legal jeopardy does not suspend its duty. Yet every major public move he has made this year leads back to the same place. The constitutional challenge targets the very law that governs his surrender. The press conferences are about his case. The protests are against his prosecution. The appeals to three courts were filed for his release. Even the attacks on a magistrate were over his bail. He has turned the machinery of a parliamentary opposition into a personal legal strategy.
The presumption of innocence stands; the courts, in Georgetown and if need be in Florida, will settle the criminal questions. But political judgement rests on the record, and the record is damning. Every appeal, every protest, every attack on a magistrate has served one cause. Anyone in its path is collateral damage. Guyanese voted for an Opposition. They got a legal defence fund with a seat in Parliament.

Yours faithfully,
Concerned Citizen

Source: Guyana Times

The PNCR/APNU and Forward Guyana Movement have  called for an independent investigation into the death of Gavin Kennard Douglas following his detention at the Vreed-en-Hoop Police Station, saying the post-mortem findings demand urgent and credible answers.

In a statement yesterday, the PNCR/APNU called for all CCTV footage, station records, medical reports and other relevant evidence to be secured immediately.

“The investigation must be free from police interference, and anyone found responsible for wrongdoing must face the full force of the law,” it stated.

Douglas, 32, died on October 31 after being taken into police custody. Police announced yesterday that a post-mortem examination performed by Government Pathologist Dr Nehaul Singh determined that he died from brain haemorrhage due to blunt trauma. Two Taser studs were removed from his body and lodged as exhibits.

Four ranks stationed at Vreed-en-Hoop were arrested and were being held at the Tactical Services Unit as the Office of Professional Responsibility continued its investigation. The Force pledged a thorough, impartial and transparent probe.

The PNCR/APNU said the reported head trauma and other injuries raised serious questions about Douglas’s treatment.

“A citizen who enters police custody must leave alive and unharmed. The State has a fundamental responsibility to protect every individual placed in its care,” it said.

The grouping argued that allegations of police brutality, excessive force and deaths involving law enforcement had become a disturbing feature under the PPP/C government. It contended that a growing perception of abuse of authority was undermining public confidence in institutions responsible for protecting citizens.

“The Government cannot continue to offer assurances of investigations while families are left grieving and those responsible for abuses of authority escape accountability,” it stated.

It called on the Minister of Home Affairs and the government to accept responsibility for ensuring that law enforcement agencies operate within the law and respect citizens’ rights and dignity.

The PNCR/APNU also urged Guyanese, regardless of political, racial or religious affiliation, to speak out against abuses of authority. 

“The right to life and protection under the law must never become privileges,” it said. 

On Sunday,  Forward Guyana called for an investigation independent of the police force  into the death, arguing that the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) cannot impartially investigate ranks within its own organisation.

Prompt

Forward Guyana called for a prompt coroner’s inquest, the immediate preservation of station records and CCTV footage, and the removal of the ranks involved from frontline duty pending the outcome.

Forward Guyana’s statement preceded the announcement of the arrests and post-mortem findings.

Citing the police’s initial account, the movement said Douglas was taken to the station at approximately 11.36 am, restrained by ranks at about noon after allegedly resisting, and found frothing at the mouth in the lockups at approximately 12.45 pm. He died at the West Demerara Regional Hospital.

“Whatever he was accused of, Gavin Douglas was presumed innocent. He was in the custody of the State, which owed him a duty to protect his life and his welfare,” the movement stated.

It argued that the police’s explanation did not account for how Douglas came to be in medical distress less than an hour after being restrained.

Extending condolences to his relatives, the movement said the family deserved the truth about what had happened.

Attorney Dexter Todd, who said he observed the post-mortem examination, has also called for the matter to be investigated as a possible murder.

Todd said the examination revealed extensive trauma to Douglas’s body, including injuries to the head and abdomen. He attributed the fatal head injury to blunt trauma and maintained that the injuries were not self-inflicted.

He also referred to the removal of two Taser studs from the body and raised concerns about the use of the device. While police confirmed that the studs had been recovered, their statement did not specify how often a Taser had been discharged or for how long it had been used.

Todd called for swift action against those responsible, saying the evidence required a criminal investigation.

Forward Guyana, meanwhile, questioned the independence of the OPR probe, pointing out that the unit operates within the same police command structure as the ranks whose conduct is under scrutiny.

“The investigation into his death cannot be left to the police,” it stated. “The Office of Professional Responsibility is a unit of the Guyana Police Force, sitting within the same chain of command as the ranks whose conduct is in question.”

“That is the police investigating themselves, and no family nor the Guyanese public can be expected to accept its conclusions,” it added.

The Movement cited Article 154A of the Constitution and provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture in support of its demand. It argued that the obligations to protect life and impartially investigate suspected torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment required scrutiny outside the Force.

Forward Guyana also criticised Home Affairs Minister Oneidge Walrond’s response, saying her acknowledgement of the State’s responsibility for persons in custody and the seriousness of the allegations strengthened the case for an independent investigation.

Walrond had extended condolences to Douglas’s family and said their need for answers must be recognised.

“When someone is taken into police custody, the state assumes the responsibility for that person’s safety and well-being,” she said.

The minister said the allegations surrounding Douglas’s death were serious and could not be dismissed, while stressing that the evidence must establish what occurred.

She said she expected the OPR investigation to be thorough, impartial and conducted urgently. 

“There must be accountability wherever the evidence leads. If wrongdoing is established, appropriate action must follow,” Walrond stated.

Forward Guyana contended, however, that an expectation of impartiality did not resolve the institutional concerns surrounding the investigation.

“Impartiality cannot be ordered into a unit of the very Force whose ranks are under scrutiny,” it stated.

The movement criticised what it described as the absence of specific commitments from the minister.

“Every commitment in her statement is in the passive voice. The facts must be established. Accountability must follow. Justice must be allowed to take its course. Not once does the Minister say what she will do,” it said.

It argued that Walrond should have outlined steps to secure evidence, remove the ranks concerned from frontline duties and place the investigation beyond the reach of the Force.

Forward Guyana called on President Irfaan Ali’s government to transfer the investigation to an independent body and make its findings public. Its demands also included allowing the family an independent pathologist at the post-mortem, securing all relevant CCTV recordings, station diaries and lockup records, and naming the ranks involved.

“The burden of explaining this death lies on the State, not on a grieving family,” the movement said.

Source: Kiskadee Watch

What began as a largely peaceful protest outside the Georgetown Magistrate’s Court yesterday escalated into violent confrontations between supporters of the We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) party and members of the Guyana Police Force, with police opening fire after demonstrators began hurling missiles at officers.

An 86-year-old man was among those reportedly shot during the confrontation, which unfolded in the afternoon hours as Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed was being transported back to the Lusignan Prison following proceedings in his extradition matter.

The demonstration, which began during the morning hours, continued throughout the day as supporters gathered outside the courthouse calling for Mohamed’s release.

Although WIN officials had encouraged supporters to engage in peaceful protest, tensions escalated significantly as the afternoon progressed.

During the morning, protesters remained relatively orderly, with only occasional flare-ups while the extradition proceedings continued before Chief Magistrate Judy Latchman.

One such incident occurred when Head of Special Branch, Senior Superintendent Prem Narine, appeared on a balcony of the courthouse.

His appearance prompted angry reactions from sections of the crowd, with protesters shouting various things at him. The remarks stemmed from the controversial October 12 shooting incident outside Narine’s Kitty residence, during which he discharged his firearm in the direction of a vehicle carrying Mohamed and two other men.

The circumstances surrounding that incident remain disputed, with Mohamed maintaining that he was the target of an attempted assassination.

Despite the heated exchanges, the protest continued without major confrontation for much of the morning.

However, the situation deteriorated during the afternoon as police prepared to transport Mohamed from the courthouse back to the Lusignan Prison, where he remains on remand in connection with a separate cybercrime charge.

Some protesters began throwing missiles at police officers, prompting a response from ranks as the confrontation intensified.

According to accounts of the incident, police officers then opened fire in the direction of protesters, with several shots heard during the unrest.

An 86-year-old man was reportedly struck by gunfire, while other persons were also said to have sustained injuries during the confrontation.

The elderly man’s condition was not immediately established.

The violence subsequently spread into sections of the Stabroek Market area, where makeshift barricades were erected along roadways and several objects were set alight.

Police officers were seen extinguishing flames at different locations, while some demonstrators continued confronting ranks.

At various points, persons were seen charging through the barricades towards police officers, while officers responded as they attempted to regain control of the area.

The Political Director of WIN subsequently urged persons who sustained injuries during the confrontation to urgently contact the Office of the Leader of the Opposition.

The afternoon’s confrontation represented a dramatic escalation from the morning’s demonstration, which had been largely peaceful despite heightened emotions over Mohamed’s continued detention.

Earlier in the day, Chief Magistrate Latchman had refused an application to revoke Mohamed’s bail in the ongoing extradition proceedings, finding that the existence of separate pending criminal charges was insufficient to justify revocation.

However, Mohamed remained in custody because of a separate charge under the Cybercrime Act concerning the alleged unauthorised disclosure of surveillance footage connected to the October 12 shooting incident.

Mohamed and Police Constable Ryan Greene were jointly charged on October 30 and remanded to prison until November 24 after pleading not guilty.

The Opposition Leader’s detention has sparked protests by WIN supporters, who have raised concerns about the circumstances surrounding his arrest, the criminal charges against him and his treatment while incarcerated.

Yesterday’s demonstration was intended to press those concerns while his extradition proceedings continued, but descended into violence following the confrontation between demonstrators and police.

The circumstances surrounding the police’s use of firearms, the shooting of the elderly man and the total number of persons injured remain to be fully established.

At the time of this report, it was unclear whether any arrests had been made in connection with the afternoon’s disturbances.

Source: Kiskadee Watch