December 8, 2021
By Hafsatu Z Bangura
Ibrahim Kargbo on the 7th December 2021 appeared before Justice Manuella Harding on one count charge of sexual penetration contrary to section 19 of the sexual offences Act 2012, Act No.12 of 2012 as repealed and replaced by section 4 (a) (iii) of the sexual offences (Amendment) Act 2019 Act No.8 of 2019.
According to the particulars of offence Ibrahim Kargbo (junior) on the 1st January and 31st January 2021 in the Western Area of the Republic of Sierra Leone engaged in an act of Sexual Penetration with a child.
Fourth Prosecution Witness (PW4) DPC 13387 Abdul Aziz Kargbo said he knows the victim and the accused person, he said he was on duty on the 6th April 2021 when a case of sexual penetration was reported by the mother of the victim.
He continued that D Sargent Harding allocated the matter to him for investigation, he said he issued a medical request form to the complainant on behalf of the victim for medical examination and was returned on the 23rd April 2021 and has been in custody.
The said medical report was tendered in court and identified as exhibit A1-4 to form part of the court records. Prosecution witness furthered that on the same day he obtained statements from the complainant, the victim and other witnesses.
He went on that on the 6th April 2021 he and other officers together with the victim and sister-in-law left the police station to arrest the accused who was at Manor Coner Lumpa Waterloo.
He concluded that they arrested the accused and obtained statements from the accused persons. He said on the 8th April 2021 he and his colleague detective Bendu left the station to visit the alleged crime scene and that they took photos of the scene but that the complainant could not pay for the said photos and to which they failed to produce the photos to be tendered as part of the evidence because the complainant refused to pay money for the said photos.
In his cross examination by defense counsel when asked about the age of the victim and investigations pw 4 confirmation of the said victims age, prosecution witness said he was unable to confirm the age of the victim, that according to the victim’s mother the age of the child was 11 years based on the victims school report card whilst in police report the prosecution witness couldn’t ascertain the age of the child in the report.
The matter has been adjourned to the 14th December 2021. The defense counsel was represented by RS Bangura whilst the state was represented by OV Robbin Mason Jnr.