Yesterday’s court appearance by the fourth prosecution witness in the criminal trial pertaining to the suspected PIU shooter was lacking. The witness was scheduled to give evidence in front of Judge Ebrima Jaiteh.

At the hearing, Director of Public Prosecutions AM Yusuf requested an adjournment, citing the fact that the witness he planned to summon does not speak English and finds it difficult to comprehend his arguments.
Additionally, Yusuf said that there was no state counsel present in the Attorney General’s Chambers at the time he was speaking with the witness.

The subject was postponed until December 11th.

A day earlier, Mama Jabbi, the third prosecution witness, had concluded her testimony under cross-examination.
The witness informed the court that she was acquainted with the mother of a certain Musa Camara, who is employed by the GRA.

She clarified that President Barrow and Musa Camara’s mother, Maimuna Barrow, also known as Korka, were brothers.
She went on to say that she initially spoke with Musa Camara, who sent the information to the Gambia police, after obtaining Ousainou Bojang in Djouloulou.

Upon being questioned about Maimuna Barrow’s connection with the president of the republic, DPP Yusuf objected to the inquiry, stating that the witness’s response would probably be hearsay or an opinion.

Nevertheless, the court rejected the objection and determined that the query was pertinent.

Under cross-examination, Defense Attorney Lamin J. Darbo reminded the witness that, in accordance with court documents, she was physically present in the president’s home village of Mankamang Kunda on September 30, 2023. The witness responded that she couldn’t recall if she was there or not.

The witness was subsequently informed by the defense attorney that she had made up her account and had set up Ousainou Bojang, an innocent man, in order to get the one million dalasi that the president had offered in exchange for any information leading to the identity of the two police officers’ murderer.

The witness denied making up any stories, but defense attorney Darbo maintained that everything of the testimony she provided—aside from her identity, residence, and employment—was made up and that her account was made up.

The witness retorted that she was on oath and that she had only given the truth to the court.

The hearing goes on.