For alleged possession of pistol…. Business Tycoon Goes To High Court

By Janet A Sesay

Business Tycoon, Alie Jaffa, yesterday made another appearance before Magistrate Santigie Bangura of Pademba Road court No.2 and was sent to the High Court for further trial for allegedly been in possession of pistol without license at the Young Sports Club at Wilkinson road.

Accused Jaffal was standing trial before the court on six count charges ranging from possession of arms without license, having in control of small without license, unlawful concealment of arms without license, keeping greater number of small arms without license and carrying offensive weapon all contrary to law.

The indictment state that accused Jaffal on Saturday 6th April 2024 at Young Sports Club (YSC) facility Wilkinson Road in Freetown, was found in possession of one makarov pistol without license

The indictment further that accused Jaffal was also found in possession of six caliber of 9×19mm without license and he concealed one makarov pistol without license.

The indictment further that accused Jaffal also keep greater number small arms without license and carry offensive weapon in a public place without lawful authority .

At all beginning of the trial when the charges were put to him he pleaded not guilty of the offense.

Before committal, Magistrate Santigie Bangura said the prosecutor Yusuf Isaac Sesay called five witnesses to testify before the court, adding that all the witnesses were cross examined by defense counsel Adama T. Jabbie.

He further that the testimonies of the witnesses corroborated and the pistol was tender before the court as an exhibit by the exhibit Clerk.

He said the evidence of PW2, Chief Superintendent of police Mohamed Turay of the Lumley Police Division, testified that upon arrival at the crime scene, he observed a lot of Lebanese national running helter and skelter, adding that the accused Jaffal was approaching them in anger together with other people holding the pistol in his hand.

The learned Magistrate further that the witness Turay further in his testimony that he demanded the weapon from the accused to which was discharged from him at the scene, and it was handed over to him.

The witness he said base on the information given to him about the accused and the rifle, he ordered his arrest.

Magistrate Bangura further that the evidence of the ballistic expert Detective Chief Inspector Kadiatu Nyakoi, from the Ballistic Document and Toxicology Department of the Criminal Investigation Department Headquarters said she and her colleagues, Inspector Momoh, Sub Inspector Federick Gegba and Sub Inspector Emmanuel Thompson conducted a forensic analysis on the pistol

The report he said was tender as Exhibit D1-2.

The witness he said stated that in conclusion of the examination, the gun which magazine was supposed to have eight cartridges was only found to have six cartridges and when the magazine is combined with the pistol filled with cartridges, it is capable of causing mayhem and can kill or cause wound depending on the distance from which it is shot.

Magistrate Santigie Bangura further that a video was played by the prosecution showing video footages and accused Jaffal was seen holding the pistol.

Magistrate Santigie Bangura further that at the end of the prosecution case defense counsel made a no case submission to which the prosecution replied.

He continue to all these pieces of evidence put together shows that the prosecution have shown more evidence which has pointed a very strong case  against the accused.

He considered no case submission made on behalf of the accused and the reply therefore by the prosecution to which can be upheld.

He said according to Lord Parker and Lord Lane, a no case submission could be upheld if there is no evidence connecting the accused with the offence he is charged or the evidence of the prosecution has been discredited under cross-examination so much that it would be difficult to rely on.

Magistrate Bangura further that this is what Lord Parker CJ addressed in his Practice Direction of (No Case Submission) [1962] where he stated that, a submission where there is no case to answer may properly be made and upheld.

He further that this is also the position taken by the Acting Chief Justice, the Honourable Nicolas C. Browne-Marke in the case of The State v. George Aritzabella Archilla and Others (2009) SLHC 20 (unreported).

He added that in this case, there is evidence that the accused was having a gun which is not registered, adding that this is exactly where the accused has case to answer.

He said the onus of proof lied on the prosecution.

He said Section 120 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1965 dictates that he should be committed to the High Court for further trial as rightly submitted by prosecuting counsel.

The learned Magistrate further that defense counsel in her argument said the prosecution should prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

He said however, defense counsel argue that a summary trial requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt as that the pistol was with the accused.

Magistrate Bangura therefore dismissed the no case submission by the defense and rule that the accused has a case to answer at the High Court.

He therefore committed the accused person to High Court and granted him bail to be approved by the Master and Registrar of the High court.