By Morlai Sesay
Detective Police Officer Fritzlnun Joshua Moosa, who happens to be the first prosecution witness, has on Monday, 12th February 2024, said that Amadu Koita Makolo was found in a kitchen cabinet at the residence of the fifth accused, Alima Hassan Bangura, a female police officer.
The witness said these before Justice Komba Kamanda, presiding judge over the ongoing treason trial involving Amadu Koita Makolo, Mohamed Jalloh, Sergeant Emmanuel Salifu Kamara, Bai Mamoud Bangura, and 8 others.
The accused persons are standing trial on 20 counts of charges ranging from Treason, misprison of Treason, murder, shooting with intent to murder, Haboring, and other related offenses.
According to the indictments, the accused persons planned to overthrow the government of Sierra Leone by unlawful means on a date unknown between 5 and 26 November 2023.
Before the witness's testimony, the Director of Public Prosecution, lawyer O I Kanu, cautioned the jury to be fair in their judgment at the end of the proceedings, noting that the proceeding guided them and not to be influenced by the public or sentiment.
The first prosecution witness, Fritzlnun Joshua Moosa, led in evidence by state counsel lawyer Ahmed G M Bockarie, said he is attached to the CID HQ Pademba road as the line manager of a foreign national unit and acts in the capacity of operation when necessary.
He recalled 4th December 2023, adding on that day, he was on duty at CID when an intelligence filtered in relating to their colleague Alima Hassan Bangura, the fifth accused person
Acting upon that intelligence, he said a joint team, comprising the military, police, and Integrated intelligence service, quickly organized and proceeded to the residence of the fifth accused at Sumiala town.
Reaching the said residents, he said the entire compound was a condom by the operation team.
''Since I know the accused as a colleague working at CID HQ, I shouted her name for her to open the door. I did that severally, but she could not open the door,'' the witness said.
While within the compound trying to devise strategies for gaining access to her apartment, he said the light in her apartment went off, raising eyebrows that she was hiding someone.
He said a couple of minutes while they were still outside; he said he called the accused to open the door, but there was no response. The witness said he opened the gate of the veranda that was closed, not locked, and they gained access to the Veranda, adding that some of the windows were open, and they tried to open the door, but it was locked.
A member of the team, he said, passed his hand through the window and opened the door that had a key from the inside. They gained access to the apartment, and they found the accused in the room with her two kids.
''While I was interrogating her, I heard a member of the team shouting that there was someone in the kitchen cabinets, and in the process, the military personnel who was a member of the team forcefully removed the said person from the kitchen,'' he said.
The witness said they tried to question him about his identity, but he did not respond, and eventually, another military personnel entered the kitchen and identified the said person as first accused Amadu Koita
He said he also questioned him to confirm his name but did not respond to him, adding that the military personnel brought a mobile phone that he retrieved from the cabinet.
From that point, the witness said he cautioned the first and fifth accused persons, respectively, and told them they were under arrest for the ongoing investigation relating to the November 26 coup.
Both of them, he said, were brought to the CID HQ for further investigation and handed over the mobile phones that were retrieved from them to the operations officer, Detective Superintendent Alusine Dumbuya.
The witness said they later came to know that the other phone belonged to the first accused when his hand tomb print was used to open it
He added that they did not go with a warrant but considered section 13 subsection 1&2 Act No32 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1965 when effecting their arrest.
During cross-examination by lawyer SA Coteh for the first accused, he told the witness that he did not have a warrant of arrest but considered sections 13, sub-sections 1 and 2. The witness said yes.
He asked whether the witness was just a member of the team that led the operation, and he said there were three in charge: Lieutenant Colonel Sannoh, Detective Superintendent Alusine Dumbuya, and himself
Lawyer Conteh asked the witness if he could not identify the first accused until the military personnel identified him. The witness replied that, yes, he had never known the accused persons until that day.
He also asked the witness whether he had a phone with the Whatsapp application, and he replied in the affirmative.
He also asked the witness whether he saw a wanted picture of the accused, and he said not to his knowledge, adding that a lot of pictures were displayed and could not tell exactly which one was the accused.
The witness said the operations commence before the curfew.
When he was asked whether he was the one who instructed one of the team members to open the door, he said he did not, but their notice was to gain access to the fifth accused, and he did not have a warrant.
He also told the court that he did not know the name of the military officer, nor would he be able to identify him because there were many.
He said Koita was identified in his presence and that one military officer removed him from the cabinet.
Lawyer Conteh asked the witness whether he would be surprised if the accused sustained several injuries when he handed it over to the team; the witness said yes, he did because he was battling.
In his cross-examination for the fifth accused person, Lawyer F J Kamara asked the witness whether he had EDSA electricity in his house, and he said yes.
He asked the witness whether knocking at someone resident was their standard procedure, and the witness, in reply, said their operations had changed.
He also asked the witness to tell him the distance between the window and the open door. The witness said it was one foot.
He also told the witness that the fifth accused directed them to the first accused, but the witness said no.
The second prosecution witness, Police Superintendent Ahmed Tejan Salif, led in evidence by Lawyer AGM Bockarie, said he is the Acting LUC attached to the Mountain police division.
On 29 December 2023, he said he was on duty when he received a call to join in a raid to arrest the second accused, Mohamed Jalloh. He said when they approached the location, they met the accused, tapped him on his shoulder, and told him that he should lead them to the premises of the 8th accused, Bai Mamoud Bangura, which he did.
Upon their arrival, he said they introduced themselves to Bai Mamoud and told him that they were there to search his house based on intelligence that some military personnel were hiding there. The witness said Bai Mamoud displayed the search warrant, and he gave them the go-ahead to search the house.
The witness said they searched the house and found assorted military fatigue that was of police interest at the second accused room
The items include 7 military uniform shirts, 7 military uniform trousers, two military caps, one military camp bed, one military bag, 1 pair of military boots, 2 black handsets, one voter ID card bearing the name and face of the second accused, one military belt and one military hat.
According to him, when they saw the items, they called Bai Mamoud, and in his presence, they asked the second accused, and he responded that the items belonged to one of his brothers, Sillah, who worked at Wilberforce Barracks. when asked if he was a military personnel, he said no.
Bai Mahmoud Bangura, he said, asked the accused if he was denying being a soldier, and immediately the second burst into tears like a baby, saying that he was afraid.
He said Bai Mamoud also told them that the second accused was on duty on November 26, 2023, to arrest the attackers.
He said the accused persons were arrested and brought to the criminal investigation department together with the exhibits.
He said all the items were handed over to the CID, but while in court, he could not see the 7th and 10th items.
During the cross-examination by lawyer Ade Macauley, the witness said he had been in the force for 23 years and had extensive experience.
The witness also told the court that there were no signatures on Bai Mamoud's tender statement as exhibit A2.
At this point, the prosecutor objected that both the documents exhibit A1&2 were identical.
In his testimony, PW3 RSLAF 18166142 WO1, Dominic Samura said he is attached to the Joint Purpose Unit of RSLAF.
He recalled November 26, 2023, adding that he was at the 7th Battalion Goderich barracks with family at around 8 a.m. when he heard a loudspeaker announcing that all military personnel should report to the military police post.
He said that based on that information, he went to the military police post at Goderich barracks, where he met some other military personnel, including Lieutenant Cornell PB Conteh.
While at the post, the witness said they saw Sergeant Fadika on a motorbike approaching them, barking at the accused person and stopping at the roundabout.
He said the accused jumped from the bike and began to chant that no senior military officer would serve, and immediately, he paid attention to him.
According to the witness, Lieutenant Cornell PB Conteh asked the accused if he was military personnel, and he replied that he was, and his number was 18172580.
He said upon given this number, they discovered that he was lying and that those with that number had already died.
He said he arrested the accused, took a picture of him with his Samsung mobile phone, and later handed him over to Sergeant Kanu, who was in charge of the military police post.
The picture was displayed to jury members, the court, and the accused himself for identification.
The accused confirmed that he was in the picture, but that was not the uniform he was wearing that day.
The uniform and picture of the 6th accused were produced and tendered in court as exhibits, respectively, to form part of the prosecution case.
The accused, who was unrepresented, cross-examined the witness and asked whether he was in the picture, and the witness confirmed that he was the one.
In his cross-examination, the accused told the court he was forced to wear the uniform.
At this juncture, the prosecutor requested an adjournment to prepare his next witness.
Justice Komba Kamanda adjourned the matter to 14 February 2024 for further hearing.
Comentarios