The state counsel on Wednesday responded to the application by the defence for Yankunba Tour for the production of Edward Singhatey’s TRRC recorded evidence and the autopsy report by the judicial secretary urging the court to dismiss the application for lack of merit.
The hearing was marred with heated debate between the defence and the trial judge due to the manner the state counsel was making his submission.
Responding to the submission, the state lead prosecutor AM Yusuf submitted that the prayers seeking for the judicial secretary to provide the autopsy report on the death of the late junta finance minister, Ousman ‘Koro’ Ceesay as well as the recorded and manuscript evidence of Edward Singhatey by the executive director of the Truth Commission lacked merit and should be dismissed by the court.
Prosecutor Yusuf submitted that from the totality of the evidence before the court particularly the evidences of Pa Habibou Mbaye and Momodu LK Bojang, there was no corona inquest into the matter, arguing that it was only after the police investigation, corona inquest can be provided but there was no such request in this case.
The state acting chief prosecutor also referred the court at this point to Section 4 Subsection 4(1) of the Corona Act which he readout to the court substantiate his argument.
He contended that even as it is captured in the defence’s motion for the judicial secretary to produce the autopsy report from Brikama, that is not genuine enough and such does not exist.
The defence at this point stood up to guide the prosecutor by telling him corona is not a court but a letter appointed by the Chief Justice. Counsel Sissoho argued that the entire submission of the state counsel should be expunged slamming the submission as “erroneous and irrelevant and therefore should be expunged despite he was reminded by the judge the various laws cited by the state counsel to back his argument.
As defence persist on his objection which irritated the judge and cautioned him not to interject him when speaking and should observed decorum in his court.
“We should not allow to be consumed by the problem which we were not involved. You job as prosecutor and defence is to furnish the court with fact to enable the court to deliver justice at the end of the court,” Justice Jaiteh cautioned
The state lead prosecutor further submitted that the evidence of Edward Singhatey before the Truth Commission is ferriferous as Mr Singhatey was not called as a witness.
He finally submitted that even if Mr Singhatey’s evidence is provided, the prosecution will not have the opportunity to cross-examine him.
Hearing resumes tomorrow for continuation of prosecution’s reply.
