In the absence of Counsel Lamin J. Darboe, defence proceedings were led by Counsel J. Jeng, who called the twelfth witness, Ebrima Charty, a clerk at Dabanani Chambers and resident of New Jeshwang.
Clerk Charty testified that he knew the first accused, Ousainou Bojang. He explained that his role in the case involved downloading a video recording featuring “Mama Jabbi and Ousainou” from the Kerr Fatou YouTube channel onto his personal laptop. He then converted the video into an audio file and transferred it to a silver-coloured flash drive, which he handed over to Counsel Darboe.
Charty confirmed he had signed an affidavit regarding the process and could identify both the document and the flash drive.
Counsel Jeng applied for the audio to be played in court. The State did not object, and the application was granted by Presiding Judge Justice Jaiteh. However, the first audio failed to play when the flash drive was inserted into the court’s computer. Counsel Jeng then sought to substitute the malfunctioning flash drive with another containing the same audio.
DPP Yusuf objected, arguing that the witness had only testified to transferring the audio to a single flash drive. Justice Jaiteh overruled the objection, noting the importance of allowing the defence to present its case. The substitution was permitted after the witness confirmed he had transferred the audio to multiple flash drives.
The substituted flash drive was successfully played in open court. The audio allegedly featured Mama Jabbi accusing Ousainou Bojang of killing two police officers “to dirty the President Barrow.” The witness confirmed the voices in the recording belonged to Mama Jabbi and Ousainou Bojang.
Following the playback, Counsel Jeng moved to tender the audio and the accompanying affidavit into evidence. Counsel Sillah, representing the second accused, did not object to its admissibility. DPP Yusuf, however, raised objections, stating that the State had not been served with the audio and that it was in a local language, not the official language of the court. He requested a formal transcript.
Justice Jaiteh granted Counsel Jeng’s application for the audio to be transcribed into the court’s language to enable the State to cross-examine Clerk Charty regarding its contents.
Citing Section 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA), DPP Yusuf applied to recall Defence Witness 11 (DW11) for further cross-examination. Both defence counsels strongly objected. Counsel Jeng argued that the DPP must file a formal application, while Counsel Sillah stressed the need for finality in litigation, noting that DW11 had already undergone extensive cross-examination by Counsel Wakawa, who had declared his questioning complete.
Counsel Sillah further informed the court that DW11—referred to as “the white lady”—had left the jurisdiction. Justice Jaiteh ruled that before any order to recall the witness could be made, it must be established whether DW11 was still in the country. The court noted that the witness had previously testified to residing in the UK, owning only a compound in Brufut.
The court ordered the prosecution to verify the witness’s presence in the jurisdiction and instructed the court registrar to contact DW11 via her UK number for confirmation.
The case was adjourned till November.
Read Other Articles In Headlines
