“They should have come to the court as a sign of respect so that we would have informed them if there was an issue,” he said. However, the DPP was quick to interject and inform the Judge that two of the witnesses were within the premises of the High Court during the Monday court hearing.
Jaiteh added: “I think if they are government officials, they should respect the court because they are also in the government. What is important is that at the end of the day, whatever decision we make, we wouldn’t be saying we should have added that or that. We want to have all the facts,” he postulated.
During yesterday's hearing, the defence counsel for the second accused, Sillah, informed the court that they had retrieved their affidavit in opposition, stating: "My lord, we have already filed our affidavit in opposition to the motion submitted by the DPP. However, I have retrieved it. This development is due to new information I discovered during my research concerning this case. Therefore, I urge the court to allow me until today to incorporate this information into our affidavit. We are still within our 48-hour timeframe."
The presiding judge granted the request of the defence counsel, but urged Sillah to submit the affidavit by the end of today, Wednesday. He also instructed the DPP to respond to the affidavit in opposition by Thursday. This, he explained, would allow the defence team to reply regarding the legal points by Friday.
Testimony of (DW5)
Nfamara Badjie, a local security guard at a lodge in Brufut, who is Defence Witness (DW5) in the ongoing PIU shooting incident involving Ousainou Bojang and Amie Bojang, testified yesterday before Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the High Court in Banjul.
In his detailed testimony, led by Defence Counsel Lamin J. Darboe, the witness stated that he knew the first accused person, Ousainou Bojang, as they worked together at a lodge in Brufut. He emphasised that he was an employee there before Ousainou Bojang.
When asked where he was on the 12th of September 2023, the witness replied, “That was the evening I left work to go home.”
Further inquiries probed whether he saw Ousainou Bojang on that day. The witness confirmed this, saying, “It was Ousainou who took over from me that evening. The following day, Wednesday, I came to work and relieved him of his duties.”
Responding to a question from Defence Counsel about what happened on Wednesday, Badjie stated, “Nothing happened that day. I closed at seven, and I was relieved by a colleague named Tumani because Ousainou was off duty on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday.”
“I also provided a statement at the Banjulinding Anti-Crime Unit (ACU) when I was taken there. I don’t know the officers who took me to Banjulinding, but I heard them call out the names Pateh and Lamin Cham. A statement was taken from me, but I was unable to read it because I am not educated.”
When asked if he would recognise the statement if it were shown to him, he affirmed positively. After the statement was read and interpreted to him in Mandinka, he acknowledged it as his own.
“I didn’t write the statement myself. I was speaking while they wrote it. When they finished writing the statement, it was read to me.”
Following no objections from State Counsel, the witness's statement was tendered and marked as Exhibit D34.
During cross-examination by the defence counsel of the second accused person, Sillah, the witness was asked if he was the one who relieved Ousainou Bojang of his duties. He maintained his earlier position, asserting that he was the one who did so.
“Is it correct that you and Ousainou worked together for a long time?” the defence counsel asked. The witness responded affirmatively, adding that they had worked together since 2021.
“In the place where you work, did you use guns?” the defence counsel inquired. The witness replied that they did not use guns at their workplace.
During further cross-examination by the DPP, the witness was asked if he knew why Ousainou Bojang was in court. He responded, “Ousainou is accused of killing two police officers.”
The DPP then asked where he heard that news. In response, the witness said he heard it from Ousainou's family, explaining that “because the place where I work and Ousainou's compound are separated only by a fence. I was also informed by Ousainou's brother.”
