July 15, 2021
By Audrey John
The matter between the Inspector General of police and Hon. Emmanuel Saidu Conteh and three others has taken a new dimension with the state acting as the prosecutor.
The matter which was expected to be heard a day earlier suffers setback, because of the tribute of Late Eke Halloway and Lawyer FB Conteh.
State counsel John AK Sesay informed the Bench that he is representing the prosecution on behalf of the police.
Taking the witness stand, prosecution witness number one, detective police constable 9268 Joseph J Collins attached to the Major Incident Unit at the Criminal investigation department Pademba Road recognized all four accused persons in the dock.
He said on the 4th of July 2021, he was on duty with six other investigators when the 3rd accused was arrested and brought in to the office in respect of the above matter for further investigation.
He said in connection to the matter, the following items were brought for safe keeping, unassembled pistols, twelve empty magazines and one hundred live rounds ammunition.
The witness said in furtherance of the investigation, the team made request to relevant authorities for expert opinion, namely the ballistic expert and the cyber unit.
He said following the request, findings were reduced to a report submitted by the ballistic expert on the examination of the exhibit, i.e. the arms and ammunitions, while the cyber unit submitted a report based on information on the mobile phones retrieved from all four accused persons.
Explaining further, PW1 said the team visited the scene at the Queen Elizabeth II quay at cline Town for investigation.
He said during that visit, statements were obtained from relevant witnesses including a policy statement by the head of the scanning facility were the arms and ammunitions were discovered.
He went to say that to enhance investigation; the commissioner of the Sierra Leone National Commission for Small Arms made a statement on the position and requisition of small arms in Sierra Leone.
He said the exhibits involved have been duly registered and retained in custody of the exhibit clerk at the Criminal investigation department (CID).
Explaining his role in the entire investigations, the witness told the court that he was in the company of detective inspector May Kanneh who interviewed the 3rd accused and in the process he was cautioned and questioned in English and his statement was recorded in English, signed in his own hand writing.
The prosecution was about to tender the statement of 3rd accused when lead defense counsel Lansana Dumbuya informed the Bench that the prosecution is only furnishing them with that statement in court, which according to him is not the proper procedure.
Replying to the defense, state prosecutor JAK Sesay said the reason as to why they did not furnish the defense with the statement is because it was obtained in the presence of a legal practitioner and in the process the name of second accused was mentioned.
The statement was later tendered as exhibits A1-26.
In continuation of his examination in chief, PW 1 said during the cause of investigations at the quay, the area were the items are found was revealed, and that the team was led to the site for physical examination of the vehicle which is an extension of the scanning process.
He said at the scene, the team was shown a grey colour pathfinder 2008 model in which it was alleged the arms and ammunitions were found.
He said investigations also revealed that the owner purchased the vehicle in April this year, contrary to his assertion that it was bought in May this year.
Investigations also revealed that the said vehicle was delivered into a shipping company named United Invested Group owned by a Sierra Leonean based in Mary Land United States.
The witness said the said pathfinder was among four other vehicles loaded in a container shipped to Sierra Leone by the above mentioned shipping company.
He said based on the bill of laden the ultimate recipient is allegedly Hon. Emmanuel Saidu Conteh
On the 7th of July 2021, the witness said he was with detective inspector May Kanneh who obtained further voluntary statement from the 3rd accused.
The witness assured the court that he will be in a position to identify the said documents and exhibits if given time.
State prosecutor JAK Sesay said for the sake of sanity of the proceeding he wished to take a date for the witness to come and do the needful.
Counsel for the 1st accused, JM Jengo object to the application and further stated that he don’t know if the case is never sanitize before brought to court, as stated by the prosecution.
Counsel for 2nd accused Lansana Dumbuya also objected to the application on the grounds that the matter is serious and if the witness has tantalized the testimony he should be cross examined.
Responding to the defense, state prosecutor JAK Sesay refers the Bench to section 99(1) and 113(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1965 and paragraph 203 of Archibald Criminal Practice 36 edition.
Defense counsel for all of the four accused persons re-applied for bail on behalf of their clients citing section 79 of the criminal procedure Act of 1965 and the Bail Regulations of 2018.
State prosecutor JAK Sesay in response stated that bail is the discretion of the Bench. He further submitted that status cannot be the motto to grant bail, the offenses are serious and what the court need is for the conditions to be laid.
Furthermore in as much the witness did not cross examined the court he cannot shut his eyes on the matter.
JAK Sesay in continuation stated that the second consideration pursuant to Archibald Criminal Practice 36 edition should be included if bail should be granted.
After listening to both sides magistrate Keikura refused all four accused persons bail and adjourned the matter to Monday 19th July 2021.