The
defence counsel E. Sanneh, representing the 2nd accused, Momodou O.S. Badjie,
yesterday challenged the evidence-in-chief of detective Sergeant Alhajie K.
Manneh, in the economic crime case involving 10 GNPC officials before Justice
O. Ottaba at the Special Criminal Court in Banjul.
The
accused persons are Sira Wally Ndow-Njai, Momodou O.S. Badjie, Fafa Sanyang,
Cherno Marena, Seedy Kanyi, Muntaga Momodou Sallah, Momodou Taal, Louie Moses
Mendy, Noah Touray and Madun Sanyang.
When
the case was called, DPP S.H. Barkun appeared for the state alongside A.
Yakubu.
The
defendants were represented by senior counsel A.A.B. Gaye, S.M. Tambadou,
O.M.M. Njie, E. Sanneh, A.N.D. Bensouda, R.Y. Mendy, Y. Senghore, E.E. Chime,
C.E. Mene, S. Taal and S. Sillah.
Continuing
his cross-examination, counsel E. Sanneh appearing for the 2nd accused, Momodou
O.S. Badjie, asked the witness whether in his last testament he told the court
that he is at the major crime unit for the past seven years.”
“That’s
correct.”
“You
also told the court that you cautioned the 2nd defendant, and you are required
to put your name on the statements?”
“Yes.”
“The
three cautionary statements you obtained from the 2nd defendants are they the
same as exhibits K1, 2 and 3?”
“Yes.”
“Can
you show to the court where your name is written on exhibit K1?”
“I
told you that my name only appeared on K5.”
“By
that statement do you mean that your name did not appear on K1?”
“I
said again that my name only appeared on K5.”
“Is
it not the case that your name did not appear on exhibits K1, 2 and 3 because
you did not record the statement of the 2nd defendant?”
“I
recorded the cautionary statement.”
“I
will take it that you are familiar with the investigations that led to the
arrest of the 2nd defendant?”
“I
am not part of the investigations; I only recorded the cautionary statements.”
“As
you claim to caution the 2nd defendants, would it be right to say that you know
the circumstances leading to the arrest of 2nd accused?”
“I
cannot remember that, my task was only to record the statement.”
“If
you cannot remember circumstances leading to the 2nd defendant’s arrest, how
could you be certain that at the time you recorded the statements from him, you
accorded him his rights?”
“The
investigative team will be able to tell that soon after the arrest as I was
only assigned to record statements.”
“Have
you ever worked for the NIA?”
“I
am the traditional police, original police officer.”
“At
the time of the 2nd defendants arrests, were you at the NIA?”
“I
was asked to meet them at the NIA.”
“So
your evidence that you questioned the 2nd defendant at the Major Crime Unit was
not true?”
“I
said I recorded his statement at the NIA, not at the Major Crime Unit.”
“What
is your rank in the police?”
“I
am a detective Sergeant.”
“Do
you want this court to believe that a detective sergeant could record the 2nd
defendant’s statement in the offices of the NIA?”
“I
recorded this statement at the NIA.”
“The
reason why your name is not on the cautionary statements of the 2nd defendant
is because they were recorded by the intelligence officers at the NIA?”
“The
statements bear the logo of GPF, not NIA and were recorded by police officers.”
“From
what you are saying, anyone that works for the police could record 2nd
defendants statements?”
“All
statements that bear police logo were recorded by me and others.”
