Freetown Magistrate Court No. 1 went to law school yesterday when Magistrate Komba Kamanda of the said court told defence lawyer, Alhaji Mustapha Kamara that a mere inconsistence in a Preliminary Investigation (PI) matter does not warrant a discharge of that matter.
Magistrate Kamanda, whiles quoting directly from section 121 of the Criminal Prosecution Act, said “inconsistence must be very material before you can deviate from the said section before a matter is discharged as a result of the inconsistence.”
The issue of inconsistence came into play when defence lawyer, Kamara representing nine accused persons on 9 count charges, ranging from conspiracy to wounding, malicious damage and riotous conduct, among others raised the issue.
The lawyer, while making his submission on conspiracy, said the prosecution has failed to fulfil sufficient case in terms of evidence to show that the accused did commit the alleged offences.
Lawyer Kamara went on to state that all accused were not charged with substantive and right charges. According to him “an agreement to do a lawful act by an unlawful means is conspiracy.”
Whiles submitting on inconsistence, the defence lawyer said the second witness told the court that he saw the first, second and seventh accused throwing stones. According to the lawyer, the witness also went ahead by saying, “because the scene was so chaotic, he did not see anybody,” which was not in line with the initial statement on which grounds he was submitting for a discharge of the matter.
When asked by Magistrate Kamanda as to whether a mere inconsistence in a PI matter warrants a discharge, the defence lawyer responded that, “you can’t” but however went on to state that, “because of the interpretation of section 121 of the Criminal Prosecution Act, I therefore relied on the second limb of the section for the matter.”
The matter was adjourned to Tuesday 15th December 2015 and all accused were released on an existing bail.
By Mohamed Kabba
Thursday December 10, 2015
ADVERTISEMENT