By: Audrey Raymonda John
The High Court on Wednesday heard the conclusion of Abdul Kpaka’s evidence-in-chief in his ongoing murder trial, where he maintained that he had a loving relationship with his late girlfriend, Sia Kamara, and never wished to cause her harm.
The prosecution is expected to begin cross-examining Kpaka when the matter resumes on 29 July 2026.
Led in evidence by his lead defence counsel, E.T. Koroma, Kpaka was questioned about the pattern of blocking the deceased on WhatsApp, as reflected in email exchanges that had already been admitted as evidence before the court.
Responding to the questions, Kpaka explained that whenever disagreements occurred between them, he preferred to avoid physical confrontation by blocking Sia Kamara’s phone number and limiting communication with her.
He told the court that he would sometimes withdraw certain privileges as a way of making her reflect on her actions. However, after receiving pleas from Sia, or from her parents, sisters, friends, or other relatives on her behalf, he would eventually unblock her and restore normal communication.
“I usually did not respond to her email messages,” Kpaka told the court.
He added that whenever he blocked her on WhatsApp, he would later accept appeals made by her or people close to her, after which he would unblock her and they would resume their usual conversations through WhatsApp and telephone calls.
When asked whether he truly loved Sia Kamara, Kpaka responded in the affirmative, stating that the love they shared was what kept them together throughout their relationship until her death in August 2024.
Counsel Koroma further asked Kpaka whether he would ever think of hurting someone he loved.
“No,” Kpaka replied.
He told the court that his actions towards Sia were based on love, protection, and guidance. He said he supported her during her time at Fourah Bay College and continued to assist her when she travelled to Nairobi, Kenya.
Kpaka further testified that he purchased flight tickets for her to visit him and her family during holidays and also travelled to Kenya to see her. He added that when she was diagnosed with a heart condition in 2018, he partially supported her medical expenses.
“I loved and comforted Sia throughout our relationship,” he told the court.
Defence counsel also referred Kpaka to a booklet containing email exchanges between him and the deceased, which had previously been admitted as Exhibits LL1 to LL45.
According to the defence, some of the emails showed instances where Sia’s parents allegedly pleaded with Kpaka to unblock her, while other pages contained photographs said to show Sia during a hospital admission following a blackout.
During the proceedings, lead prosecuting counsel Yusuif Isaac Sesay objected to the identification of the photographs. However, the trial judge overruled the objection, allowing Kpaka to identify the person in the photographs as Sia Kamara.
Some of the email exchanges were subsequently read aloud in open court.
Counsel Koroma later questioned Kpaka about the police search conducted at his residence.
Describing his bedroom, Kpaka told the court that his bed was made of wood, with foam padding in the middle and on both sides. He said the wooden frame remained visible at the top and bottom, while the mattress was positioned inside the bed frame.
He further testified that when the police searched his house, the bedroom and other parts of the residence were intact, and several photographs were taken from different angles.
The defence drew the court’s attention to what it described as differences between Kpaka’s account and the testimony of the prosecution’s scene-of-crime officer, who had earlier produced only one photograph showing part of the bed and described the mattress as being placed on top of, rather than inside, the bed frame.
The bed remains a significant aspect of the case because, according to Kpaka’s police statement, he alleged that on the morning of 13 August 2024, Sia Kamara suffered an attack, fell while coming from the bathroom, and struck her head on the edge of the bed.
Following the conclusion of Kpaka’s evidence-in-chief, state counsel Yusuif Isaac Sesay requested a date to begin cross-examination.
Defence counsel E.T. Koroma urged the court to ensure an expeditious hearing of the matter, stating that “justice delayed is justice denied.” He also informed the court that he intended to call additional witnesses for the defence.
In response, Sesay told the court that Kpaka began giving evidence in March 2026 and only concluded in July, adding that he needed adequate time to prepare for a thorough cross-examination.
Before the adjournment, Counsel Koroma reminded the court about two pending rulings, one relating to bail and another concerning an application for the case to be stated to the Supreme Court.
The trial judge indicated that rulings on both applications would be delivered in due course.
The matter has been adjourned to Wednesday, 29 July 2026, when the prosecution is expected to begin its cross-examination of the accused.