However, Bunama Cham, who is Prosecution Witness three (PW3) in the ongoing trial, firmly rejected Lawyer Camara’s assertion, stating: “No, that is not the case, because I was a witness to the incident.”
Camara pressed: “I am putting it to you that the gunshot which allegedly killed Buba Jammeh never and ever came from the accused person.” In response, the witness stated: “I will never accept that theory, because I have never had any problem with my eyesight, and I have seen how the incident happened.”
Lawyer Camara asked again: “At this point during the scuffle with Buba, when you held the muzzle of the gun, how far was the late Buba Jammeh behind you?”
In his reply, while demonstrating how it happened in court in the witness box, Cham said: “I held Buba Jammeh with one hand, while my other hand was on the muzzle of the gun, as I pleaded with him to step back.”
Camara then asked whether that was the moment the gun was fired. The witness replied in the negative.
When further questioned about the distance between himself, the accused person, and the late Buba Drammeh, the witness stated that it was approximately two to three metres, adding: “As I was helping Faburama Sawo, a mentally challenged person who was being assaulted, and as I turned back, the accused fired the shot,” he claimed.
Lawyer Camara asked: “You told the court that a military officer appeared on the land, refused to give his name, and only showed his card. Did you say that?”However, the witness denied this, stating: “I did not say the military officer appeared on the land. Instead, he found us sitting by the roadside.”
Camara continued: “I am also putting it to you that you, together with Pa Boy, Foday, and the late Buba Jammeh, attacked the accused person when he instructed the bulldozer driver to switch off the engine and stop clearing the land.” The witness responded in the negative.
When asked again who held the muzzle of the gun during the scuffle, Cham stated that he himself was the one who held it.
“Then Pa Boy and Foday joined you to disarm the accused person,” Camara pressed. The witness again responded in the negative.
Camara added: “When you got hold of the muzzle of the gun and were engaged in a scuffle with the accused person, were you able to disarm him?” The witness replied: “No, but technically I was.”
Asked whether he knew the dimensions of the land in question, the witness replied in the negative, adding that a selected committee was responsible for that.
Camara further asked how they intended to create a demarcation if they did not know the dimensions of the land. Cham maintained that he was not responsible for that, explaining that it was the two men who lost their lives, Buba Jammeh and Foday, who were responsible.
When questioned about how many people from Gunjur went to the land on the day of the incident, the witness replied that he did not know the exact number.
Lawyer Camara pressed further: “How many people came from Misera to the land?” The witness stated that he could not give a specific number, but estimated that at the time of the confrontation, there were roughly between 45 and 60 people.
Camara then asked: “When you went to the land to create a buffer zone and demarcate it, did you take cutlasses to help clear the area, since it was bushy?” Cham replied: “In those circumstances, I was shocked to notice that only four people had cutlasses.”
Camara continued: “Are you aware that the police urged both parties not to take any action on the land until the matter was resolved in court? ”In reply, the witness said: “I was not aware of the police restraint, but I heard of the court injunction.”
When asked between which parties the injunction was granted, the witness replied that it was between the Jammeh Kunda family and the Sanyang Kunda family.
