By Janet A. Sesay
During yesterday’s proceedings at a Court Martial in Freetown, Defence counsel, Sigismond Conteh has told the court that prosecutors have ambushed his client, Amadu Koita Makolo by attempting to tender a document served late at night.
“I was served the document at 8pm which had passed visiting hours,” the defence counsel reiterated as he made this submission before Justice Komba Kamanda and the 12-member jury.
The document, according to the defence, was a conversation extracted from his client’s phone, but was not confronted with such extractions during police investigation. He also submitted that his client had been in custody without access to his phone.
“I have to speak with my client about the documents as I have to cross-examine the witness that will tender the document in court,” Counsel Conteh submitted as he applied for an adjournment. Counsel I. Kamara who is defending the fifth accused made similar claims.
He informed the court that his client, Alimatu Hassan Bangura was served with the document in the morning before coming to court, but not everything written was put to her during the investigation.
Responding to the defence’s submission, State counsel Ahmed James Bockarie said the adjournment sought by the defence was premature as the Prosecution had witnesses to lead in evidence.
Counsel Bockarie also told the court that the documents were served last Tuesday to the keepers of the accused at the correctional facility as demanded by the law. He argued that the law required that processes regarding the accused should be served to the custodians of the accused.
“The documents were served before 5pm, and the accused was confronted with the documents during investigation,” state counsel challenged the defence. He said conversations were extracted from the phone of the fifth accused’s phone, and that was the basis of the investigation.
“The court will see it when the accused’s statements tendered in evidence,” he assured the court adding that Questions relating to certain calls and numbers were posed to the accused during the investigation.
He also submitted that the document served was not prejudicial as it was part of the accused’s statements, and the document served would not embarrass the defence. The state counsel therefore urged the judge to reject the defence’s objection as he promised that all remaining documents would be served to the defence.
Having heard arguments from the two sides, Justice Komba Kamanda stood down the court for an hour for the defence and state counsels to go through the documents.