adhere728v90


Lead Defense Counsel Madieu Sesay Esq. representing Alhaji Amadu Bah aka LAJ yesterday Tuesday 9th August, 2022 intimated the Bench that he would file no case submission of the alleged robbery case against his client.


Lawyer Sesay made the submission after the prosecution led its final witness to close the case.

The accused LAJ was under preliminary investigation for the offences of robbery with violence and assault contrary to law.

According to the particulars of offence, on Sunday 12th June, 2022 at Leonco Filling Station, Congo Cross in Freetown, the accused violently robbed the total sum of NLe4,200 (Four Thousand Two Hundred new Leones) and assaulted Musa Mansaray, a pump attendant in a manner thereby occasioning actual bodily harm.
Led in evidence by the State Counsel Yusif I. Sesay, Fifth Prosecution Witness (PW5), Detective Police Constable Alimamy Morlai Turay, who was marked as the final witness, said he was attached to the Congo Cross Police Division as an Exhibit Clerk when the matter was reported.

He recalled that on Sunday 12th June 2022, one black colour Tecno mobile phone, black and green colour condom and the sum of Le490,000 (Four Hundred and Ninety Thousand old Leones) was handed over to him as exhibits for safe keeping.

The PW5 furthered that he registered the said exhibits in their Court Exhibit Book against the Serial No.52/2022, adding that the said exhibits had been in their custody. He produced and tendered them in court.

The Defense Counsel raised an objection for the tendering of the mobile phone, noting that its owner neither went to court to testify nor did he/she identified it. He argued that the proper foundation was for the owner to identify the mobile phone, adding that the best evidence rule only applies to documents. In his reply, State Counsel Y.I. Sesay remarked that the witness laid the proper foundation and on that basis, the witness fits in that category to tender the exhibits.

The learned State Counsel furthered that the best evidence rule mentioned secondary evidence in the absence of primary evidence, noting that the Defense Counsel’s objection was a misplacement and therefore urged the Bench to discountenance the objection raised. Magistrate Ngegba ruled that even though the owner of the phone did not identify it, it would not affect the admissibility of evidence. He therefore discountenanced the objection raised by the Defense Counsel.

Lawyer Sesay at this stage renewed his previous bail application citing some provisions in the Bail Regulations which, according to him, make it mandatory for Magistrates and Judges to grant bail.Magistrate Ngegba however told the Defense Counsel to refrain from misinterpreting Statutes, noting that the said provision does not state it is mandatory.

He denied the accused bail and remanded him to prison, whilst the matter was adjourned to Tuesday 16th August, 2022.