The independent witness said in court yesterday that the first accused, OusainouBojang, read his statement recorded by EbouSowe, the police detective at the Anti-Crime Unit in Banjulinding, and confirmed what he had said in the statement and thumb-printed it.
The witness said he also thumb-printed the statement and wrote his telephone number on it. Before the statement was written, he added, the statement recorder asked Ousainou Bojang if he was in the position to say anything and he, Ousainou, responded in Wolof saying yes.
He further said the statement recorder whilst asking Ousainou about the incident that happened on12 September was also writing down the accused’s statement accordingly.
He added that after Mr Sowehad finished writing the statement, he Mr Sowe read it out in English and translated it in Mandinka forthe witnessto understand because he did not have a good understanding of Wolof.
He also told the court that Sowe asked the accused to listen and as the statement was being read to him, he the accused told Sowe to read it out loudly, “which means he was reading it out to both Ousainou and I,” the witness said.
The accused was given the statement and he went through it, the witness said, adding that he heard from the recording officer that he wrote exactly what the accused said. “Upon returning the document, he then asked Ousainou to thumb-print it,” the witness told the court. “After that, he then asked me to thumb-print it.”
The witness was given the document in the dock to confirm and he admitted that, that was the statement he thumb-printed and wrote his telephone number on.
A.M. Yusuf, Director of Public Prosecution, applied to tender the cautionary document in court as an exhibit.
The witness further testified that after the statement was taken, he was having a conversation with the accused and the accsued told him that he had worked in Sukuta as a moulding block maker and he mentioned the name of someone, whose house he had built.
During the course of the conversation, the witness told the court that the accused told him the area in Brufut where he resided and he, the witness, told the accused that his sister also resided there.
At this point, Counsel L. Darboe raised an objection saying that the witness was before the court to establish the voluntary and cautionary statements obtained in his presence but that he was going beyond into other issues “irrelevant” in the trial-within-trial.
DPP A.M. Yusuf argued that the witness was testifying on the allegation that the accused was beaten and drugged, which he said the witness was giving details about.
Upon the objection made by the first defence counsel, Justice Jaiteh asked that the witness be allowed to continue his testimony.
Asked what he got to know about the accused during their conversation,the witness said the accused told him that he resembled someone known to him. “I told him that my brother did his schooling in Brufut and Ousainou told me that he also attended the same school in Brufut,” the witness said, adding: “I then told him my brother’s name and he told me that they were in the same class.”
The case continues today.
