By: Audrey Raymonda John
The trial of Nehemiah Alimamy Samuel Kargbo, who is facing a charge of sexual penetration involving a minor, took a new turn before Justice Mark Ngegba at the High Court in Freetown as defence counsel Charles Williams questioned the age of the alleged victim during cross-examination of a police witness.
The defence also challenged aspects of the police investigation, particularly the production of the victim’s birth certificate and the absence of an age assessment report.
According to the indictment, Kargbo is charged with sexual penetration contrary to the Sexual Offences Act, as amended. The prosecution alleges that on dates unknown between 26 November 2024 and 28 December 2024, at Freetown in the Western Area of Sierra Leone, the defendant engaged in an act of sexual penetration with a child.
Led in evidence by State Counsel E. Daisy, Detective Police Constable 13480 Hassan Sesay, attached to the Family Support Unit (FSU) at Lumley Police Station, testified as a prosecution witness.
Sesay told the court that on 25 December 2024, while on duty, the victim’s father reported a case of sexual penetration, which was subsequently assigned to him for investigation.
The witness stated that statements were obtained from the victim’s father, and a police medical report form was issued for the victim’s examination and treatment. He added that the completed and endorsed medical report was later returned and remained in police custody.
Detective Sesay further testified that on 25 January 2025, together with Detective Sergeant 8805 Titus Sesay, he cautioned and questioned the defendant in accordance with the Judges’ Rules. He said that on 26 January 2025, investigators visited the alleged crime scene, where photographs were taken. He further stated that the defendant later admitted to the allegations made against him.
The medical report, dated 15 January 2025, was produced in court for identification and marked as Exhibit Z1-Z4.
The defendant’s statement to the police was also tendered and marked as Exhibit B1-B6, while photographs taken at the alleged crime scene were admitted as Exhibit C1-C4.
During cross-examination, defence counsel Charles Williams asked the witness whether the defendant had informed investigators that the alleged victim was his girlfriend. Detective Sesay responded in the affirmative and further stated that the alleged victim had also described the defendant as her boyfriend.
Responding to additional questions, the witness said that the defendant stated in his police interview that his aunt and the victim’s mother were aware of their relationship and had advised them to be careful to avoid pregnancy.
Detective Sesay also confirmed that the alleged victim did not initially produce a birth certificate during the investigation. However, he said the document was later submitted and indicated that she was born on 1 August 2007.
Defence counsel then directed the witness to page four of the defendant’s statement, which stated that the victim’s mother and the defendant’s aunt were aware of the relationship and that both parties openly identified themselves as boyfriend and girlfriend.
When asked whether he had obtained a statement from the victim’s mother, Detective Sesay said he had not because she was unavailable at the time of the investigation.
At that stage, defence counsel challenged the credibility of the birth certificate, arguing that no age assessment had been conducted during the investigation. In response, the witness maintained that there was no need for such a procedure.
Following the conclusion of cross-examination, State Counsel E. Daisy applied for an adjournment.
Justice Ngegba adjourned the matter to 16 June 2026 for further proceedings. The defendant was remanded in custody pending the next hearing.
This version improves grammar, clarity, legal reporting style, and neutrality while preserving the facts presented in the court proceedings.