Chief Inspector Michael Nkrumah, the investigator in the ongoing alleged Coup trial has been accused of fabricating stories in court.
Chief Inspector Nkrumah, the 14th Prosecution Witness (PW 14) in the case in which some 10 persons have been charged, has given evidence and is facing scrutiny.
Dr. Frederick Yao Mac-Palm, the Chief Executive Officer of Citadel Hospital, Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Dr. Benjamin Agordzo, and eight others have all been charge
While Dr. Mac-Palm and seven others have pleaded not guilty to conspiracy and high treason, ACP Dr. Agordzo, and Col. Kojo Gameli have also denied the charge of abetment.
They have been admitted to bail and are standing trial.
Cross-examination
Under Cross-examination from Lawyer Victor Kodjoga Adawudu, counsel for five out of the 10 accused persons, the investigator was accused of fabricating stories to the tell court.
Counsel had also contended that Donya Kafui – the 2nd Accused person, gave a police caution statement without an independent witness.
Counsel also accused the investigator of denying the 2nd accused person his constitutional rights to his choice of counsel when his cautioned statement was obtained.
But, the Investigator, who is said to be the last witness for the prosecution denied all the allegations.
He told the court that in the course of the investigation, he listened to audio tapes that were given to the investigation team.
Asked to tell the court if in the course of the investigation he invited any voice expert to identify the voices on the audios, he said no.
“Because there are eye witnesses we spoke to and identified the voices,” he explained.
But, the witness agreed with counsel that, between where he sat and Inspector Akrasi, who was the independent witness, another officer Inspector Tano sat in between them.
Counsel pointed out that, one of the duties of an independent witness is to be present with the accused person while his statement is being taken which the witness admitted.
He said, “That’s so and Akrasi was present while the statement of A2 was taken.”
When it was put to him that Inspector Akrasi was not present at his table when the statement was taken from 2nd accused, he admitted it.
“That’s true he was not present by my table. But was present at the office where the accused statement was taken and he heard all that happened and after the statement was interpreted to him in twi and accused persons approved it and thump printed,” PW 14 told the court.
He denied counsel’s suggestion to him that, his evidence to the court was an afterthought.
The investigator also agreed with counsel that, where Inspector Akrasi sat when he claimed he was acting as an independent witness, has been his official desk where he worked for the past 4 to 5 years.
“That is true but before he was asked to be an independent witness, I drew his attention to it and introduced him to the accused before his statement was taken,” the witness explained to the court.
It was the case of counsel that, because Inspector Akrasi was not present by his table, he could not tell the age of 2nd Accused as was captured on September 21 and November 28, 2019, respectively. But, the witness denied it.
He told the court that, Inspector Akrasi heard everything the accused persons said but he might have forgotten the age and other things because of the duration between when the statement was taken and the dates he came here.
Choice of counsel
It was the contention of counsel that, on these two said dates, there was no counsel of 2nd accused person’s choice present when the cautioned statements were taken.
The witness agreed but said, “I informed him to consult a counsel of his choice.”
It was then suggested to him that he never informed A2 of his constitutional right of his counsel to be present when he took
his statement on 21 September 21 and November 28, 2019.
But the witness disagreed saying, “I informed him of his constitutional rights to counsel of his choice.”
Alleged Fabrication
The witness also told the court that he obtained a charge statement from the 2nd accused person on February 7, 2020, in the presence of the independent witness was one Harriett Agbenyevia.
Even though he agreed that 2nd accused person spoke in the ewe language which was interpreted to him (the investigator) by Harriet Agbenyevia, he offered an explanation.
“That’s correct and I must say that on that very day counsel for A2, Victor Kodjoga Adawudu came and requested for the previous cautioned statements to read through. After he had read through the statements he spoke to the accused in ewe which I didn’t understand and after counsel told me his client do not speak and understand twi so I should get an ewe interpreter that was when I went to call the said Harriet Agbenyevia to assist me with the interpretation as requested by counsel.
At this point, counsel accused the investigator that what he told the court was “a fabrication.”
But the witness disagreed.
Counsel contended that 2nd accused on that day told him the investigator that, he does not speak twi, and not counsel as he wanted the court to believe.
But, the witness said, “If A2 was able to speak to me then, he spoke to me in twi.”
When counsel suggested to him that he (Victor Adawudu) for 2nd accused was present because he (investigator) informed 2nd accused of his constitutional rights to be represented, he said he rather informed counsel and not his client.
“I informed the counsel that on that very day, I was going to take charge statement of the accused not only him (but other accused) and if he wanted to make himself available he can come and witness the taking of charge statements for all his clients including A2. So it was not A2 who asked him to come,” he noted.
When it was put to him that, he invited Harriet Agbenyevia to be an independent witness because 2nd accused told him, that he speaks his native language ewe, the investigator said “That’s not true.”
“It was not A2 who told me he cannot speak twi. It was rather counsel who told me A2 do not understand and cannot speak twin, so I should look for an interpreter,” he noted.
The three-member panel of Justice Stephen Oppong, Justice Hafisata Amaleboba, and Justice Afia Serwah Asare-Botwe, (president) has adjourned the case to Monday, June 13 for continuation.
Source: Kasapafmonline.com
