As the trial of Ousainou Bojang gets closer to its conclusion. Counsel Lamin J. Darboe has filed his final address of argument before the High Court in defence of Ousainou Bojang’s innocence, challenging every angle of the State’s case against Ousainou Bojang. Bojang, the first accused in the 2023 Sukuta-Jabang Traffic Lights shooting.
Ousainou Bojang is charged with five counts including the murder of Police Constables Sang J. Gomez and Pateh Jallow, the attempted murder of Ansey Jawo, and acts of terrorism.
Counsel J. Darboe’s brief argues that the prosecution’s case is built on “bad faith,” unreliable witnesses, and a complete lack of forensic evidence, while presenting a alibi supported by digital call logs and eyewitness testimony in favour of Ousainou Bojang.
Counsel J. Darboe started his brief of argument by focusing on the credibility of the alleged Soldier Eyewitnesses Ismaila Bojang (PW1) and Bakary R. Jarjue (PW2), two soldiers who claimed to have witnessed the shooting and pursued Ousainou Bojang.
Counsel J. Darboe pointed out the alibi gap in the soldiers’ statements, noting that they claimed they were returning from beach training at Senegambia/Palma Rima for an upcoming trip to Turkey.
Counsel J. Darboe pointed to Exhibit D13, call logs which he argues prove the soldiers were not at the beach for training as they claimed. Counsel J. Darboe contends that the call logs show the soldiers were in New Yundum, not Senegambia or Palma Rima, at the time of the incident.
Counsel J. Darboe went as far as to suggest that the trail of evidence is “strongly suggestive” of the possible killers being elsewhere, questioning the motives and presence of the prosecution’s star witnesses at the scene.
Counsel J. Darboe questioned PW1’s testimony that he chased the shooter for over 400 meters and returned to secure the crime scene within a mere 11 to 12 minutes. Counsel J. Darboe further pointed to visual inconsistencies noting that while PW1 described the shooter as having “bow legs,” no other witness or forensic data supported the identifying feature.
On Mama Jabbie, Counsel J. Darboe’s brief spares no criticism for Mama Jabbie (PW3), the businesswoman and marabout who claimed Ousainou Bojang confessed the killings to her in Senegal. Counsel J. Darboe labels her testimony as “false and unsubstantiated,” because Mama Jabbie claimed to have recorded a confession, but testified she “lost everything” after uninstalling WhatsApp. Counsel J Darboe labels her testimony as a fabrication to hide the lack of a real confession.
Counsel J. Darboe argues Mama Jabbie’s testimony was motivated by the D1 million reward pledged by the President, rather than the truth.
Counsel J. Darboe suggested a political connection pointing at Exhibit C1 (call logs) which indicates Mama Jabbie was in Mankamang Kunda (the President’s home village) on dates she previously denied, and Counsel J. Darboe highlighted her relationship with Musa Camara, the President’s nephew who allegedly coordinated the arrest with the President’s sister to secure a conviction.
Counsel J Darboe stated that the only surviving victim, PC Ansey Jawo (PW10), could not identify Ousainou Bojang as her shooter in court, admitting she only recognised him from social media photos after his arrest.
Counsel J Darboe highlights forensic failures emphasised that after years of trial, the State failed to produce a single piece of forensic evidence DNA, fingerprints, or ballistics linking Ousainou Bojang as the forensic experts (PW8) and post-mortem results (PW7) did not provide any link between Ousainou Bojang and the alleged murder weapon or the crime scene.
Counsel J Darboe further questioned the testimony of Lamin Fofana (PW4), a watchman, who testified he found a gun that was “dismantled in pieces” after the shooter allegedly threw it at him. Counsel J. Darboe questioned how a dismantled weapon could be reliably linked to the shooting.
Counsel J. Darboe stated in Ousainou Bojang’s own testimony that Ousainou Bojang provided an alibi, stating he was at a lodge or at Bojang Kunda during the time of the shooting and explained his trip to Senegal was to seek spiritual protection because he was being blackmailed by a “white lady” who threatened to release nude videos of him.
Counsel J. Darboe stated Ousainou’s testimony was supported by digital proof (alibi) by Sharon (DW11), who provided Exhibit D38, containing 11 pages of WhatsApp logs showing continuous, unbroken communication with Ousainou Bojang throughout the night of the incident.
Counsel J. Darboe argues the logs prove it was “physically impossible” for Ousainou Bojang to have been at the Sukuta-Jabang Traffic Lights while chatting with Sharon from his lodge in Brufut.
Counsel J. Darboe further stated that corroborating witnesses as Sulayman Faal (DW2) and Famara Bojang (DW5) testified to seeing Ousainou Bojang at his place of work (a lodge) and at Bojang Kunda during the hours of the shooting, where they were “calm and chatting” about the news of the police officers’ shooting incident seeing in the social media.
Counsel J. Darboe concluded his brief by accusing the State of “bad faith” and subjecting Bojang to a “trial by the media”. Counsel Darboe cited the testimony of government officials like the National Security Adviser (DW8) and the Government Spokesperson (DW6), who publicly labelled Ousainou Bojang a “rebel” and “UDP member” just days after his arrest without any evidence.
Counsel J. Darboe argued that the high-level press conferences and the President’s bounty were part of a “State’s plan to prosecute an innocent young man”.
Counsel J Darboe further stated that despite public claims by officials that CCTV footage of the shooting existed, no such footage was ever presented in court by the state.
Counsel J Darboe reminded the court that Ousainou Bojang maintained that his alleged cautionary statements were obtained through force, claiming he was made to thumbprint blank papers by Ebou Sowe (PW6)
In his prayer to the Court, Counsel J. Darboe urges the Court to look past the “sensationalization” and “falsity” of the prosecution’s witnesses. Counsel Lamin J. Darboe maintains that the State has failed to meet the burden of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” and prays for the total acquittal and discharge of Ousainou Bojang.
