By: Audrey Raymonda John
The ongoing murder trial of journalist Samuel Brima Mattia took a pivotal turn during the cross-examination of a prosecution witness at the Pademba Road Court No. 1, presided over by Magistrate Sahr Kekura.
Journalist Joseph Mendel Lamin, popularly known as “Manager Dust,” is on trial alongside commercial bike rider Morlia Kamara and driver Umaru Timbo. The three are facing two counts: conspiracy to commit murder and murder, contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, as amended by the Abolition of the Death Penalty Act 2021.
The prosecution alleges that on January 15, 2025, at the Voice of Peace and Development (VOPAD) Radio Station in Kissi Town, Waterloo, the accused conspired to murder journalist Mattia.
During cross-examination, Defense Counsel M. Baratay challenged the credibility and consistency of the evidence regarding the statements obtained from the accused. The prosecution witness, under questioning, confirmed that he and two other police inspectors Matthew and Foday were present when the accused gave their statements.
However, when asked whether all three accused were present during the initial statement-taking, the witness admitted that only the first accused was present, and the others were brought in later.
The defense also questioned the presence of legal representation during the process. The witness acknowledged that no lawyer was initially present during the statement recordings, and that a lawyer only arrived later. It was further put to him that the lawyer who later came did not actively participate in the early stages of interrogation.
A document, marked as Exhibit B1–25, was tendered in court. The witness testified that the document was obtained from a colleague and was only in his possession, not authored by him. He confirmed that he took a charge statement from one of the accused, but when asked to read it aloud, the State Counsel objected, noting that there was no official charge statement on file.
Defense Counsel M. Baratay initially requested an adjournment but later opted to continue with proceedings. However, Magistrate Kekura intervened, citing procedural confusion and irregularities caused by the defense’s shifting position. He ruled to adjourn the matter to maintain fairness in the trial.
The case was adjourned to May 27, 2025, for further hearing.