Bakary Jarjue’s strike enthuse Central Lanuja to slender win over Madina Salaam in Gunjur Nawettan qualifiers
Jun 19, 2014, 11:26 AM
Mudou Badjie, the second prosecution witness, yesterday continued his testimony under cross-examination in the criminal trial involving Momodou Jarju, alias Rongo, and Abdoulie Efry Mbye, at the Banjul Magistrates’ Court before acting-Principal Magistrate Taiwo Ade Alagba.
Rongo and Efry Mbye are being tried for allegedly giving false information, making false documents, uttering false documents and for conduct conducive to a breach of the peace.
Continuing his testimony under cross-examination, Badjie told the court that he was born and adopted in Banjulinding, adding that he was part of the council of elders in Banjulinding, since the time of the former Alkalo of Banjulinding.
When asked by defence counsel Gaye, whether he wrote the letter to the Office of the President or council of elders, Badjie told the court that it was the council of elders that wrote the letter to the Office of the President, and they were later called by the President to come to State House.
“Upon our arrival we were told by the then Secretary General that the President called us to tell us to maintain peace and forget our differences in the
He added that they all agreed to what the Secretary General said, and returned to Banjulinding and informed the council of elders, adding that they later called a general meeting.
He said before they summoned the general meeting, the first accused person, Momodou Jarju wrote a separate letter to the Office of the President, indicating that the people of Banjulnding did not want the Alkaloship of Eric Tundeh Janneh, because he disunited the people of Banjulnding and was grabbing land.
“The 1st accused person and his people further indicated that the people of Banjulnding did not want the Alkaloship of Eric Tundeh Janneh, but instead want Foday Jabang to be Alkalo of the village,” Badjie continued.
“I believe that the 1st accused had not respected what we were advised to do at the Office of the President, otherwise he would not have written a separate letter to the Office of the President.”
The case at that juncture was adjourned till 26 July 2011.