By: Alieu Jallow
Following the conclusion of the voir dire and the commencement of the court address on the subject matter of the voir dire, counsel LK Mboge, defense for the second accused person, urges the court to reject the documents tendered by the prosecution, specifically the voluntary and cautionary statement of 15th September 2023 obtained from the first accused person, Ousainou Bojang, by couple detective Ebou Sowe of the Police Anti-Crime Unit.
“For all the reasons, with the irregularities and inconsistencies, I humbly urge the court to reject the documents,” counsel Mboge emphasized.
Counsel Mboge made a case that the first accused person clearly indicated that the statements obtained from him by couple detective Ebou Sowe were not voluntary. His submission and assertion have already found weight through the other cautionary statement admitted by the court.
“The entry number 79 on page 19 is at 15:58, stating that detective couple Sowe returned detained Ousainou Bojang to his cell. Interestingly, on the same date, 15th September 2023, there were other cautionary and voluntary statements obtained from the first accused person, with only one having a time stamp at 15:28 PM, while the rest have no time stamp. I want your lordship to note that from 12:00 to 12:00 noon is all the 15th of September, so it is obvious, or the only conclusion, that the first accused person denied the charges before or after the subject of that voir dire,” Counsel Mboge argued.
Counsel Mboge also referred the court to page 20 of the D3 (Police Anti-Crime Diary), from entry number 86 to 90.
“On page 20 of D3 (police diary), the entry of these so-called confessionary statements is made after 16:55 PM, and I submit to you that the police cannot reserve the time in the entry on exhibits D3 from 16:55 to 13:20 PM,” he strongly emphasized.
He, therefore, stressed that the exhibits sought to be tendered were made in gross violation of the rights of the first accused person and for a fair trial because these purported confessions are prejudicial and far outweigh any benefits.
On his part, Senior Counsel Lamin J Darboe, counsel for the first accused person, debated that every visitor entering the Anti-Crime Unit complex leaves his/her phone at the entrance, with the exception of the staff of the unit.
“The independent witness said he received more than three phone calls, and I submit to the court that unless you are a security officer working at the Anti-Crime Unit, you must leave the phone at the gate,” J Darboe submitted.
Defense counsel for the first accused person, Ousainou Bojang, further submitted that the obtaining of the statement by the Anti-Crime Unit was done one week apart, and the independent witness doesn’t and couldn’t remember any of the charges against the accused person, neither could he recall the cautionary statement of the first accused. He further submitted that even at the airport, charges levied on his client, the independent witness did not remember the cautionary wording of the accused person.
“All the fluctuations in this matter should be resolved in favor of the first accused person,” counsel submitted.
The state prosecutor, AM Yusuf, put forward that the essence of the voir dire is sought to be tendered in the main trial. The subject of the voir dire was the statement of the 15th September and not any other.
DPP further submitted that the first issue to be ascertained is whether the statement of the 15th September 2023 was voluntarily taken from the first accused person, and in his view, it was voluntarily taken based on the evidence presented in court. He argued that the testimony of PW 1 (Ebou Sowe) and PW 2 (Alieu Cham), and the cautionary statement, are evidence, and exhibits D3 explained how those statements were obtained from the first accused person.
“From a legal point of view, as per the records of the court, the evidence of DW 1 did not in any way disprove the evidence of PW 1 and 2, and there is nothing in the voir dire that discredited PW 1 and 2 regarding the obtaining and recording of the said statement from the first accused person, which is the subject of the voir dire,” he presented.
While on his feet, counsel for the state highlighted that his learned colleague (counsel J Darboe) misunderstood what a panel entailed, and that couple detective Ebou Sowe was part of the panel. After interrogation by the panel involved, he was personally tasked to obtain the cautionary and voluntary statement of the first accused person.
The case was adjourned to March 6th, 2024, for ruling on the matter.
