Ousainou Bojang leaving the court. (PhotoCredit Kexx Sanneh)
By Landing Ceesay
In the ongoing trial of Ousainou Bojang, accused in the tragic deaths of two Police Intervention Unit (PIU) Officers, a startling revelation emerged from Counsel Lamin J. Darboe. Representing Bojang, Darboe informed the court that two Anti Crime Officers, Sub Inspector Jobe and Musa Bah, allegedly threatened Bojang with death if he didn’t disclose the whereabouts of the murder weapon.
This disclosure came during the cross-examination of Police Investigator Ebou Sowe in the voir dire (Trial within trial) of the Sukuta Jabang Traffic Lights murder case.
Counsel Darboe initiated the trial within a trial, expressing concerns about the circumstances under which Bojang’s statements were obtained. He suggested they involved coercion, including the use of drugs and physical abuse.
However, Sowe refuted these claims, asserting that Bojang was neither beaten nor drugged during his time at the Police Anti-Crime Unit from September 13th to 23rd, 2023.
During cross-examination, Darboe insisted that his client had indeed been subjected to beatings and death threats by two members of the Police Anti-Crime Unit.
Sowe confirmed that Bojang was indeed under police custody when he was taken to the Anti-Crime Unit, emphasizing his presence during Bojang’s interrogation by a panel of investigators.
Sowe identified members of the panel, including Chief Inspector Yero Saidy, Inspector Ceesay, Inspector Jamanka, Superintendent Lamin Cham, Boto Keita, and other officers routinely present.
He said at the panel’s interrogation of Ousainou Bojang, everyone present was either a Police Officer or another Security officer.
“The 1st accused person (Ousainou Bojang) was interrogated by Police Officers without an Independent witness,” Counsel LJ Darboe asked the witness.
“Yes, the first interrogation there was no independent witness present,” the witness told the court.
The witness told the court that Ousainou Bojang confessed to the panel that he committed the crime at the Sukuta Jabang Traffic Lights.
“Did any of you in that room tell him (Ousainou Bojang) that he need not say anything to that panel,” Counsel LJ Darboe asked the witness.
“Yes, my lord, he has always been reminded of that, he need not say anything if he wishes,” the witness responded to Counsel LJ Darboe.
“With all your meticulousness, you forget to mention that in your evidence in chief,” Counsel LJ Darboe told the witness.
“I have always maintained that in my entire testimony, that the suspect (Ousainou Bojang) has always been informed that he has a right not to say anything,” the witness responded.
Mr. Sowe told the court that he personally kept on reminding Ousainou Bojang that he needed not to say anything to the panel.
“I am putting it to you that in the presence of Inspectors, Chief Inspectors, and Superintendents it will not be your place for such a Junior officer like yourself to assume that role,” Counsel LJ Darboe told the witness.
“My lord, I was not in that panel as a mere spectator. I mostly played a supervisory role,” the witness told the court.
Asked at what time he commenced taking the cautionary statements of Ousainou Bojang on the 15th of September 2023, Mr. Sowe said his engagement with Ousainou Bojang started at around 12 mid-day and he started taking his statements around 1 pm.
About the Independent Witness (Alieu Cham), Mr. Sowe told the court that he met him in the Anti Crime Complex around 12 mid-day.
He said the Independent Witness Alieu Cham, is not a security officer.“Anti Crime is not a social complex, what was he (Alieu Cham) doing there,
“Anti Crime is not a social complex, what was he (Alieu Cham) doing there,” Counsel LJ Darboe asked the witness.
“Anti Crime is a Public Institution. What he told me was that he had issues to sort out,” the witness responded.
“As an investigator, you should know what was he sorting out at Anti Crime,” Counsel LJ Darboe told the witness.
“I do not know. I was more particular that he has no issue with the actual matter,” the witness told the court.
The witness insisted that Alieu Cham, the Independent Witness was brought there by superintendent Lamin Cham, a member of the panel from Sukuta to be a so-called independent witness.
“So Alieu Cham, the independent witness was present for 1 hour before you commenced recording the cautionary statements,” Counsel LJ Darbpe asked the witness.
“Before the commencement of taking the cautionary statements, it was less than 20 minutes,” the witness said.
“But you said that you started recording the actual cautionary statement at 1 p.m. pm but you started the process at 12 mid-day,” Counsel LJ Darboe told the witness.
“My lord, the entire process started around 12 mid-day, and the independent witness has to be there,” the witness said.
Mr. Sowe said the accused (Ousainou Bojang) had to narrate his version of the story before his statement was recorded.
When asked whether he had audio or video recordings of Ousainou Bojang while obtaining his statement, Mr. Sowe told the court that he did not.
“Did you ask the 1st accused (Ousainou Bojang) to call any of his family members,” Counsel LJ Darboe asked the witness.
” Counsel LJ Darboe asked the witness.“Anti Crime is a Public Institution. What he told me was that he had issues to sort out,” the witness responded.
“As an investigator, you should know what was he sorting out at Anti Crime,” Counsel LJ Darboe told the witness.
“I do not know. I was more particular that he has no issue with the actual matter,” the witness told the court.
The witness insisted that Alieu Cham, the Independent Witness was brought there by superintendent Lamin Cham, a member of the panel from Sukuta to be a so-called independent witness.
“So Alieu Cham, the independent witness was present for 1 hour before you commenced recording the cautionary statements,” Counsel LJ Darbpe asked the witness.
“Before the commencement of taking the cautionary statements, it was less than 20 minutes,” the witness said.
“But you said that you started recording the actual cautionary statement at 1 p.m. pm but you started the process at 12 mid-day,” Counsel LJ Darboe told the witness.
“My lord, the entire process started around 12 mid-day, and the independent witness has to be there,” the witness said.
Mr. Sowe said the accused (Ousainou Bojang) had to narrate his version of the story before his statement was recorded.
When asked whether he had audio or video recordings of Ousainou Bojang while obtaining his statement, Mr. Sowe told the court that he did not.
“Did you ask the 1st accused (Ousainou Bojang) to call any of his family members,” Counsel LJ Darboe asked the witness.
“Anti Crime is not a social complex, what was he (Alieu Cham) doing there,” Counsel LJ Darboe asked the witness.
“
