Killa Ace’s counsel says prosecution witness fabricated evidence

Wednesday, December 05, 2018

Counsel Patrick Gomez, who is representing Killa Ace in the breach of peace and assaulting a police officer trial, told the second prosecution witness, Pierr  Mendy, before Magistrate Joof of the Kanifing Magistrates’ Court that he fabricated his evidence.

When the case resumed on the 3rd December, 2018, Sergeant 2118 Gomez told the court that he was holding brief for Prosecutor Oley Bobb while Counsel Patrick Gomez said he was representing the accused.

Sergeant Gomez rose and asked the prosecution witness, Pierr  Mendy, whether  he would be able to identify the uniform if he saw it and he answered in the positive, adding that it was a blue uniform.

The defence counsel objected and said that the prosecutor should apply to tender the uniform but not to lay any foundation. At this juncture, the witness identified the uniform after it was shown to him.

The witness, Pierr  Mendy, told the court that he took the accused to the Serrekunda Police Station because of his conduct, and would not allow the police to conduct a search on his bag. He adduced that the accused assaulted Demba Bah, requiring the accused to be brought to court. He said from the Serrekunda Police Station, the accused was taken to their base at Bijilo and his statement was recorded.

Under cross-examination, he described the uniform as blue and short-sleeved and was torn on the left side, front and top, noting that the epilate on the uniform showed that it was from The Gambia Police Force.

He testified that he knew before that the uniform was torn, stating that he knew this on the day of the incident but did not know whether it was on the left or not. He said he did not examine where the uniform was torn because it was at night, denying that he did not see the uniform before.

He disclosed that he did not know whether all the buttons on the uniform were intact, adding that two were missing during the incident. He stated that he could not tell how many of them were in the mission because he was not the team leader, and he did not know who the team leader was.

He informed the court that there was no command and it was a daily policing, maintaining that there was no command when he was told that Police Officer Bah told the court that there was command. He narrated that they were looking for suspected stolen properties which criminals sell at night at the market.

He adduced that there were more than four officers in uniform, and that he saw Bah, Jobe and Couple Camara near him, adding that he could not recall the others and said that there were millions of reported suspected stolen properties but could not tell.

He went on to say that they were looking for any suspected stolen mobile phone, noting that there were several complainants and could not mention their names. He maintained that he showed the accused his warrant card when he approached him, saying that he did so because it was at night. He confirmed that he showed the accused his warrant card before searching him and told him that he is a police officer from the Anti Crime Unit, and that he wanted to conduct a search on his bag. He said he told the accused that they were in operation and raiding.

He testified that he had an instance where he wanted to search someone and he refused to be searched and was arrested and charged because he resisted arrest, stating that he could not recall the name of the person. “I can remember Ceesay who showed his warrant card to the accused and I was close to Ceesay. This is why I saw him. He was not the only one who was close to me. He is the only one I can remember,” he told the court.

Pierr Mendy further informed the court that First Class Bah was near him but he could not say whether  Bah saw him showing his warrant card to the accused,  noting that he gave his statement on the 29th of October, 2018, at the Anti Crime Unit and there were police officers who were present. However, he told the court that he gave his statement when he was alone.

At this juncture, Counsel Gomez applied to tender the said statement of the witness and the prosecutor did not raise any objection, and it was admitted in evidence. “I wrote events as they unfolded on the 29th October, 2018,” he testified.

He said that Couple Ceesay showed his warrant card to the accused after he (witness) showed his warrant card to the accused. Counsel Gomez asked him why was it necessary for Ceesay to show his card to the accused, and in response, he stated that Ceesay did so to support his arrest of the accused.

He was quick to say that he did not mention this in his statement. The case was subsequently adjourned to the 12th of December, 2018, for continuation.

Author: Dawda Faye