#Article (Archive)

In Busura Alkalo trial PW5 cross-examined

Jan 27, 2011, 9:40 AM | Article By: Yai Dibba- Jallow

Defence counsel Buba Jawo on Monday continued his cross-examination of the fifth prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of Alhagie Omar Faye, the alkalo of Busura Village.

The Busura village head is standing trial before Magistrate Babucarr Secka of the Brikama Magistrates’ court on a charge of abuse of office, a charge he had since denied.

Under cross examination the witness, admitted that he did not know the content of the apology letter the accused sent to the people of Marakisa Village.

Counsel Jawo put it to him that the reason why he had denied knowledge of the content of the said letter was because all what he said about the letter was not true, but the witness still maintained that all what he said was true.

When further put to him that the allegation that he gave in court was not true, the witness responded in the negative.

He also admitted under cross-examination that exhibit A did not mention the name of Jarju kunda family and other compounds, but it pointed out Marakisa village.

The witness also told the court that the owner of the land decide what to put on the land, this was in respond to counsel question that exhibits A and B did not mention any rice field.

He further told the court that the arrest and detention of Ebrima and Bakary Jatta at the Brikama Police Station was not about the land issue,when it was put to him by defence counsel, Jawo.

The witness also agreed under cross-examination that does two people were not from the Jarju Kunda.

Counsel further put to him that the purpose of the meeting with the four villages was about the allegation from Ebrima and Bakary Jatta for the land dispute. The witness responded in the negative.

He also told the court that no document was recorded during the meeting, but the four villages agreed that the disputed land belonged to Marakisa, including the accused himself.

He said he did not know the size of the land because he did not go there with a tape line, when he was asked by counsel whether he know the size of the disputed land.

Counsel put it to him that neither the district tribunal nor the high court has ever adjudicated this matter. The witness responded that since the beginning of the matter they did not want the matter to go before the court, because they wanted to maintain the peace.

He finally told the court that he was a truthful witness.