The defense lawyer, Sagarr, cross-examined the state’s ninth witness, Momodou Touray, in the murder case involving Kumba Sinyan. Sinyan was charged with the murder of her boyfriend, Lamarana Jallow, by cutting his stomach with a razor blade, causing his death.
Counsel Sagarr began by asking Touray, the witness, about his rank in the police force. Touray stated that he is the Chief Inspector at the Special Crime Unit in Bakau. Sagarr then inquired about Touray’s whereabouts at the time of the incident, to which Touray responded that he was in Bakau, working as the Officer in Charge of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).
He testified that he was the lead investigator in the case, responsible for investigating the allegations and compiling a report for potential prosecution. He clarified that he supervised a team of officers, with Crime Scene Officer Samba Bah being one of them, and others provided assistance as needed.
Counsel Sagarr proceeded to ask Touray if he had given a statement regarding the matter, to which Touray confirmed that he had. When asked if he had the original copy of the statement, Touray mentioned that it had been filed. Sagarr then asked Touray to verify whether the statement was his and when shown to him, to which Touray confirmed it was his statement and handwriting. Sagarr then expressed the intention to tender the witness statement as evidence, and the prosecution raised no objections. The presiding Judge marked and admitted the statement as a defense exhibit.
Continuing the cross-examination, Counsel Sagarr asked Touray about the first meeting between the witness and the accused. Touray stated that they met at the Bakau Police Station on September 14, 2022, early in the morning before 8 am. Touray mentioned that other police officers, including Mariama Sowe, were present during that meeting. He clarified that he was not the Police Public Relations Officer (PRO) at that time, as that role was held by Binta Njie.
Senior Counsel Sagarr then inquired about when Njie became involved in the case. Touray simply responded that he could remember that. The defense questioned Touray about his previous statement regarding his claim that the investigation would continue, Touray stated that he did not recall making that statement. The court reviewed the case file and found that Touray had indeed stated that the investigation would continue after returning to the station.
The defense then asked Touray about the evidence collected during the investigation and to whom it was sent. Touray mentioned that the investigative results were sent to the Ministry of Justice. When asked for a copy of the evidence, Touray explained that it would either be with the ministry or stored in the files.
Sagarr proceeded to ask Touray about when the accused was officially charged with murder. Touray stated that he did not know the time but the information would be in the records. Sagarr then inquired about who determined the charges. Touray responded that he and one of his Junior. The defense brought up his (Touray) previous statement, where he mentioned that the accused (Kumba) had confessed to him committing the murder. However, Touray claimed not to remember the date.
When pressed about where the confession took place, Touray mentioned that it occurred at the Kairaba police station, with himself, Officer Bah, Mariama, and station personnel present. He confirmed that a cautionary statement was obtained from the accused, and in that statement, she admitted to killing the victim. However, when shown the cautionary statement, Touray stated that he did not author it and could not tell whether the confession was recorded.
Sagarr Further questions whether he (Touray) questioned the accused about self-defense. He stated that she mentioned self-defense but did not provide further details. Sagarr inquired if the investigation delved deeper into what she meant by self-defense, to which Touray replied that she had only mentioned cutting a wound on her hand but said she cut the stomach of Lama with a razor blade.
Sagarr then asked if Touray knew if the accused had been taken to the hospital for further examination. Touray responded negatively. Counsel Sagarr put to the witness that the accused had a cut on her hand, but Touray clarified that it was a small cut and confirmed that she had shown it to him. When asked if further examination was conducted on her injuries, Touray stated that he did not examine her further, because Kumb only discussed the wound on her hand.
Sagarr then asked Touray if they had taken the accused to the hospital for an examination, to which he replied that they had not. Counsel Sagarr questioned Touray about his familiarity with taking statements and how he supervised the process. Touray confirmed his familiarity and expressed satisfaction with his supervision.
When asked if the accused’s lawyer was present during the statement-taking, Touray mentioned that the family and a lawyer were present. Sagarr asked the witness whether a lawyer was present but Kumba’s lawyer, the witness negatively.
Senior Counsel Sagarr emphasized the importance of a lawyer being present as a constitutional right, which Touray acknowledged. Sagarr then inquired if an independent witness was provided during the statement-taking, to which Touray answered affirmatively. However, he clarified that it was not him who provided the witness, but rather there was an independent witness present.
Senior Counsel Sagarr raised a question about the timing of the independent witness, suggesting that they were brought up after the statement was taken. Touray disagreed, stating that it occurred before.
The defense then claimed that the accused was not cautioned properly, but Touray insisted that she was. Sagarr challenged Touray’s knowledge about the legal distinction between killings and murder saying not all killing implies murder, to which Touray admitted he did not know. Sagarr told the Toura witness, that PW7 didn’t testify that Kumba confessed to the killing, Touray pointed out that he was PW9 and not PW7.
Counsel Sagarr argued that the accused’s confession of self-defense does not necessarily imply murder in the particular circumstance. The judge intervened, indicating that it would be up to the court to determine.
Counsel Sagarr then asked Touray to review a document referred to as Exhibit G and determine its content. However, the state counsel objected, stating that Touray previously stated he did not make the statement, so he should not be questioned about it. Counsel Sagarr clarified that he was challenging the claim of the confession being present in the voluntary statement. Touray stated that he did not know but reiterated that the accused confessed to killing her boyfriend with a razor blade.
The defense further questioned Touray about whether he took pictures of the victim, to which he confirmed that he did. However, he stated that the pictures were with the crime scene officer. Sagarr asked Touray if he was familiar with the case, to which Touray replied affirmatively.
When asked when the case file was transferred to him, Touray mentioned that it was on September 14, 2022. Sagarr inquired about Touray’s visit to the crime scene, to which Touray confirmed that he had visited on the same day in the morning.
Counsel Sagarr asked if Touray was present when the accused person was visited at her house, to which Touray replied affirmatively. However, when asked if he was present during the first visit to the crime scene for evidence collection, Touray stated that he was not there. Counsel Sagarr questioned whether Touray attended the evidence collection, to which Touray responded negatively.
At this point, Counsel Sagarr stated that she had no further questions for Touray, and the witness was discharged. The state counsel promised to call the last state witness and the case was adjourned to Wednesday at 13:00.
By: Kexx Sanneh
