By Lamin Njie
Bubacarr Keita’s ex-wife told the high court in Bundung she never insulted the mother of the businessman rather Keita himself in a text message.
“I did not insult his mother, I have never insulted his mother. I told him ‘you bastard’. I can remember it,” the woman told judge Momodou SM Jallow when Keita’s lawyer looked to suggest she insulted the businessman’s mother.
Keita’s rape trial resumed at the high court in Bundung on Wednesday following a setback on Tuesday amid the absence of an interpreter.
At the return of the trial on Wednesday, Keita’s ex-wife who has been giving evidence as the first witness in the trial disagreed with Keita’s lawyer Lamin Camara that the proceedings of February 12, 2020 at the Cadi court was initiated with regard to the custody of her children.
“No, it’s not correct. It was part of the final judgment. Because when the Cadi dissolved the marriage, they addressed the man with regard to his duties to his children and his rights,” the woman said.
She also rejected any suggestion by Camara the Cadi court told her she was already granted divorce at home by her ex-husband.
“The court did not tell me that. They asked me if I would consider reconciling with him. I told them I cannot marry a man who has raped my sister,” the woman told the court. She said she has all the Cadi court documents – both order and judgment – when asked if she could provide them.
During the session, Keita’s lawyer also asked the witness about a D100,000 per month maintenance money she asked the Cadi court to slap on Keita.
The witness however said: “This is not about child maintenance, it’s my own iddah maintenance that I charge D100,000. Because he owes me a lot of money and I told the Cadi for him to pay back the money he owes me.”
“Therefore, it is correct to say that you were actually divorced on the 6th of November 2019 at home and not on the 12th of February 2020 at the Cadi court?” Keita’s lawyer Camara asked her.
She replied: “My marriage ended on the 12th [of February] 2020. I far as I can remember, that on the 6th he is talking about, I spent the night in his house. The day they took him to police, I slept in his room and I took him to police because of him raping my sister and that’s why the marriage ended.”
The witness’ lawyer here took to his feet and complained that the defence lawyer was putting words into the mouth of his witness by making inference the witness was saying her marriage collapsed on November 6, 2019.
“The witness never said the 6 of November was when the marriage ended, she never said she was divorced on the 6 of November. What she said is the reason for her divorce is the fact that the husband was accused of raping her sister,” Alasan Jobe complained.
Lamin Camara then bit back: “I take exception to his statement that I’m putting words in her mouth. I did not put words in her mouth. I asked her a question on specificity. If she answers a question regarding on the 6 [November], we need to get that.”
The judge intervening said the defence lawyer could only put a statement in question form. Matters then became a little chaotic when Camara asked the witness to share the day she left her ‘matrimonial’ house.
“When did you leave the matrimonial house, that’s all I want. My lord this kind of thing, it’s wasting the court’s time with explanation. Give us a day and we move on,” Camara complained when the witness said she left the following day [Nov 7] and then went ahead to explained that she had woken up and realized that Keita’s mother and sibling got information she had taken Keita to the police.
“I want to say when I left and why I left,” the witness insisted but Camara said she could not speak on things until he asked questions about them. There, the judge told the interpreter to tell the witness she was obliged to answer questions and not frame her own questions. He however said she could extrapolate but only on what she’s been asked.
“When did you leave the matrimonial house?” Camara asked again.
“Before I can answer that, can I say something?” the witness said but the judge told her to answer the question. The witness replied she left the house the following day [Nov 7].
Keita lawyer then asked the witness if it was correct she received a text message from the accused person on November 6, 2019 in the morning that she was granted a divorce and that she should leave the house. The woman said the accused sent her a message because she insulted him.
“Did you receive a message to say you have been granted a divorce and you should leave the house? Simple question?” a frustrated Camara reacted.
The witness’ lawyer Jobe interjected by telling the judge his witness should be given the opportunity to clarify.
“My Lord I understand the defence counsel wants simple answers from the witness but she should be given the opportunity to clarify and give context,” Jobe said.
“Nobody is saying that she is not supposed to give context,” the judge replied.
In her response, the witness said the issue of Keita divorcing her through a text message was not accurate.
“That is not correct, he did not divorce me. He only told me to leave his house. He sent me a message that I should leave his house because I sent him a message and insulted him. I insulted him and the reason I insulted him is because I received a call and found out that my sister was pregnant and it was him who impregnated him. That’s why I insulted him,” she said.
Camara then asked her: “It is correct that in your text message to the accused person, you actually insulted his mother in your text message and not him?” The witness in her response said she ‘I did not insult his mother, I have never insulted his mother’.
“I told him ‘you bastard’. I can remember it,” she added.
The witness then told the court she would not be able to produce the text messages between herself and the accused because she no longer used that mobile phone, after Keita’s lawyer asked her if she could. But the moment saw the state counsel making an objection to the defence counsel’s claim the state has transcripts of the text messages but the defence counsel standing his ground that they have a right to say the state has it because ‘they have it during the course of the investigation’.
Still, Keita’s lawyer continued questioning the witness by asking her if she knew a person named Pa Modou Jobe. The witness said she knows Pa Modou Jobe.
“Who is he?” Camara then asked her and the witness said he is a friend to the victim. When the lawyer asked her what his relationship with the victim was, she said the victim said he was her boyfriend.
Keita lawyer then asked the witness if Pa Modou Jobe was arrested in connection with the case in which the witness said he was called by police for questioning. She however said she doesn’t remember when Pa Modou was detained when asked by Keita’s lawyer.
Meanwhile, Keita’s lawyer also asked the witness if she made any complaint against Pa Modou Jobe at the police on the night of November 6, 2019. She witness said she did not.
Elsewhere, the top attorney asked the witness whether the ‘minor’ was already 22 weeks pregnant on the night of November 6, 2019. The witness in answering said: “Yes, between 21 to 22 weeks.”
The case was then adjourned to Thursday as Keita’s lawyer applied for the witness to produce the cadi court proceeding documents.
