|
Momodou
Denmark
11634 Posts |
 Posted - 14 Dec 2006 : 16:24:39
|
CAPTAIN BUNJA DARBOE PROTESTED
Witness tells court
By Fabakary B Ceesay &Annia Gaye
Detective Sergeant Boto Keita informed the court martial that Captain Bunja Darboe protested that he wanted to see a Lawyer before he wrote his statement.
Sergeant Keita made this revelation on Saturday 9th December 2006, at Yundum barracks in the ongoing court martial involving Captain Bunja Darboe, Captain Yaya Darboe and the other soldiers. A trial within trial has commenced in the case of Captain Bunja Darboe. The aim of the trial within trial is to challenge the allegation that the undated cautionary statement made by Captain Bunja Darboe, was made voluntarily and to test whether an independent witness was present when the latter made the statement.
Testifying before the court, Detective Sergeant 1203 Boto Keita (TWTI) who is attached to the Major Crime Unit at Police Head quarters in Banjul said he has served The Gambia Police Force for sixteen years.
He said he has been at the Major Crime Unit for one year and one week. Sergeant Keita pointed out that on the 21st March 2006; he was called by his commanding officer, Malamin Ceesay who asked him to report to their office. He said he was assigned to be part of the panel that was setup to investigate in to the foiled coup. He posited that Captain Bunja Darboe was brought before the investigate panel (the panel that was set up to investigate the alleged coup plot) at the NIA to explain his role and involvement in the coup plot. Sergeant Keita said he introduced an independent witness (Babou Loum) to Captain Bunja Darboe, He asserted that he showed the cautionary warning to Captain Darboe. He said Captain Darboe preferred to write his own statement. He added that Captain Darboe and Babou Loum both signed the statement and he signed as the officer who cautioned him. Mr. Keita was shown the said statement. He recognised the statement by identifying the name of Babou Loum and his signature. He also identified his own signature. At this juncture, the prosecutor tendered the statement and it was marked exhibit TWT one (1).
Cross Examination by Lawyer Lamin S Camara
During cross examination, counsel Lamin S. Camara asked Detective Sergant Boto Keita to tell the court the date the statement was written. Detective sergant Keita replied that he could not remember the actual date. He said it was in the early part of May. Mr. Camara asked him to look at page one of the statements (TWTI) and tell the court whose writing is on it. Keita replied that it is his own writing. He said that the accused person only wrote his name, address and occupation. He accepted that the accused person did the same writing on pages 1, 2, 3 and 4. Lawyer Camara asked him to tell the court what the accused person did not write on the statement, he said the name of the independent witness and his address. Lawyer Camara asked him to tell the court when he knew Babou Loum, and he replied ‘In 2004, when he joined office with Sergeant Ndure in Banjul.’ Sergeant Keita said he does not know the ethnicity of Babou Loum, but he knows Loum speaks Wollof and English.
Mr. Keita indicated that he could not remember the time the statement (TWT1) was taken at the NIA, but that it was in the morning. Mr. Camara asked him why TWT1 is not dated and whether it is usual for cautionary statements to be undated. Keita said he does not know why it was not dated, but it sometimes happens. Camara asked him to tell the court what an additional statement mean in police language. Keita said it means the statement was made after the first one.
Camara asked him who could have written the small 2 on the statement, he said he did not know. ‘I’m putting it to you that the accused wanted to write the date and you asked him not to,’ said Camara.
Keita said he did not do so. Counsel Camara asked him whether the 2 was part of the accused person’s signature, he replied in the negative. Camara asked him why the 2 is on the statement. Keita replied, “I don’t know why it was there” Lawyer. Camara further asked him what was the condition of the accused person on the day he wrote TWT1. Sergeant Boto Keita said Bunja appeared normal before him. Keita indicated that he did not notice anything on the body of the accused person He added that the accused was not under his custody prior to the making of the statement (TWT1). Counsel Camara asked him whether he knew what happened to the accused person prior to the making of the statement (TWT1). Keita said he did not know. Camara finally asked him whether all the other statements were dated apart from TWTI, he replied in the positive.
Cross Examination by Borry S. Touray
Lawyer Borry Touray asked him whether he advised the accused person of his right to a counsel before obtaining the statement from him. Detective Keita replied in the negative. Touray asked him whether it is correct that Bunja protested to see a lawyer before he wrote the statement (TWT1), Keita replied in the positive. Touray asked him whether he noticed a bandage on the hand of the accused person. Keita said he did not notice that because Bunja was wearing a long sleeve. Touray asked him whether he could remember that TWT1 was obtained at the conference hall where the panel normally sat and that it was in the presence of his boss, Malamin Ceesay. Keita replied in the negative. Touray put it to him that TWT1 was copied ‘word to word’ from the statement he made on the 22nd March 2006; Keita said he did not know.
Source: Source: Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue NO. 112/2006, 11-12 December, 2006
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
Topic Locked
