Charles Taylor’s defense witness, Mr. Yanks Smythe has said that certain aspects of his written statement were misrepresented as prosecutors today pointed out inconsistencies in his written statement to defense lawyers and his oral testimony in court.
Prosecution counsel Nicholas Koumjian today tried to point to Mr. Smythe that certain things about which he has testified in court differ from what he had said to Mr. Taylor’s defense lawyers when they obtained a statement from him in June 2009. For example, Mr. Koumjian pointed out that the witness has testified in court that Mr. Taylor’s rebel group, the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL) did not use child soldiers. However, his written statement made to defense lawyers in 2009 differed from this account. In his response, Mr. Smythe said that such inconsistencies were as a result of misrepresentations made of what he had said in his written statement. The witness in his testimony has said that contrary to what prosecution witnesses said in court, there was no group for child soldiers called Small Boys Unit (SBU). He said that the term SBU was created by NPFL commanders who had rescued and were taking care of children abandoned in the frontlines. Mr. Koumjian pointed out that the witness’s written statement revealed a different story.
“Mr. Witness, you told the defense last year, didn’t you that there was an SBU unit, that these were under-aged, and they were part of the NPFL,” Mr. Koumjian put to the witness.
“This is a complete misrepresentation of what i said, i never said that. This was not what i said,” the witness responded.
“The defense invented this, is that what you are saying?” Mr. Koumjian again put to the witness.
“I don’t know what you mean by they invented but this is not what i said. I said SBU as i stated in my testimony here, yes, this is what i know about SBU,” the witness again responded.
As Mr. Koumjian pressed further on what the words “SBUs were under-aged” meant when he said so in his written statement, the witness responded that “I’m saying this is a complete misrepresentation of what i said in my statement. This is not what i said.”
Mr. Koumjian also pointed out that while the witness in his testimony in court said that he never fought on the frontlines for the NPFL, his written statement revealed a different story. In the witness’s statement, he was quoted as having taken part in an attack during “Operation Octopus,” a 1992 attack on Monrovia by NPFL rebels. The witness insisted that he had again been misrepresented by those who obtained his statement.
Asked whether he had taken part “in an NPFL attack from Mount Barkeley during ‘Operation Octopus’,” the witness responded that “I didn’t take part, i was on that side but i was not at the frontline.” When Mr. Koumjian asked him whether he had said he “attacked from Mount Barkeley” as stated in his written statement, the witness again said that “I’m saying i don’t know whether the person that wrote this misquoted me but i didn’t say i attacked.”
The witness also in his testimony in court had said that the first time he met Mr. Taylor was in 1987 at the Mataba guesthouse in Libya where Mr. Taylor reportedly lived alongside dissident leaders from Gambia and Sierra Leone. Mr. Koumjian pointed out that the witness’s written statement revealed that he had met Mr. Taylor at the Libyan revolutionary training camp Tajura, not Mataba.
Reading from the witness’s written statement, Mr. Koumjian quoted that “the first time witness met CT [Charles Taylor] was in 1987 in Tajura, not at Mataba meetings.”
“Did you tell the defense that last year?” Mr. Koumjian asked the witness.
Again, the witness said that “this was a misrepresentation of what i said.”
“The person that wrote it is misrepresenting what you said?” Mr. Koumjian asked further.
“This is not what i said, that’s what i am saying,” the witness insisted.
“So you are saying that the person who wrote this has told something that isn’t true,” the prosecutor again put to the witness.
Mr. Smythe insisted that that was a complete misrepresentation of what he said. “I never saw Mr. Taylor in Tajura,” he said.
While Mr. Smythe in his testimony been rebutting prosecution evidence against Mr. Taylor, prosecutors have also under cross-examination been trying to discredit the witness’s testimony. Like defense lawyers did with prosecution witnesses under cross-examination, prosecutors have also been trying to hughlight inconsistencies in Mr. Smythe’s oral testimony in court and his written statement made to defense lawyers. It will be left with the judges to determine the credibility of the witness and whether his testimony can be relied upon.
As prosecutors concluded the cross-examination of Mr. Smythe today, Mr. Taylor’s defense lawyer, Morris Anyah commenced the re-examination of the witness. Under re-examination, Mr. Anyah will seek to clarify some of the issues that have been covered by prosecutors under cross-examination.
Mr. Smythe’s re-examination continues tomorrow.
That’s it Mr. Koumjian, short questions because these guys are not academicians and have short memories about things that are reharsed and scripted for them to say! Seriously, these guys seem to be drop-outs in their various careers and thus became disgruntled and, thus, headed to Libya to plan violence and over take of their respective governments. Can you imagine smyte being head of the Gambia? These are all criminals in the first place! This was the greater plan to distablize West Africa by these lowly citizens who call themselves patriots! Down with them!
That’s just how his Boss,Taylor behaves.He says one thing today and by the twinkle of an eye,it’s all changed.They just think that they can hoax this high-profile court by way of a hoax.
If we go deep down the lines,we would realise that this witness got the Liberian nationality just the same way in which the late Sam Bockarie had his.Taylor’s presidency was more a grief than any relief at all to the people of Liberia and the sub-region as a whole.
Mr. Yanks Smythe, is a knowledgeable witness and Prosecution counsel Nicholas Koumjian, is having a hard time cracking him. True to his name, he (Yanks Smythe), yanks the Prosecution counsel so much that, Nicholas Koumjian gets emotional and abrasive. In my honest view, the judges will have to control both of them because, a lot of times things got very personal.
Too late.Please withdraw my posting.
Hi T-Bone — sorry — which posting are you referring to — is it the one at 10:35am today?
Best,
tracey
Why did Mr. Smythe sign off on his initial statement to the defense if it was incorrect? I thought (correct me if I’m wrong) the person whom gives a statement to the prosecution or defense has to review their statement for accuracy, then sign off that the giving statements are true and correct to the best of their knowledge. Initially, I believed that this witness was truly genuine in his testimony. Although advised by Morris Kanneh that this witness can’t be trusted because “he has been cherry- picking his testimony to dovetail with what he was coach to say”(coached was alittle hard to swallow). I still gave Mr. Smythe the benefit of doubt. In light of the prosecution discovery, it seem as if Morris Kanneh has stumbled on to something interested. If you add the accusation the prosecution made about Mr. Taylor trying to manipulate witnesses testimony to the equation. It seem to me Mr. Smythe testimony could be tainted. It’s clear Mr. Smythe has been following the trail and knows the damaging information the prosecution established against Mr. Taylor. If a man/woman is loyal to a person, there is no limit they will stop at to protect that person. I think Mr. Smythe testimony is tainted and he is trying to protect Mr. Taylor.
I co-sign. You basically took the words out of my mouth Al-Solo.
Man this witness does not know how to lie, he can’t even remember what he said last year. How can the person who wrote down his statement misrepresent him if the person was appointed by the defense. This is crazy, the lies are making me drowsy, three seperate accounts they misrepresent your statement?
I understand the possibility of the first two accounts but how in the world can the third account be misrepresented. How can you not remember where you first met CT. The two towns are not even close in names or location. This is a terrible waste of time, lets move on to the next witness, this guy is not credible at all. Can’t even get his story right, didn’t the defense prep this witness before putting him on the stand.
john thompson
More like he tried to prep himself. But it seems as if Mr. Smythe is having trouble incorporating what he read in the transcripts of Mr. Taylor testimony into his own written statement (or maybe he totally forgot what he said on the record). I guess pulling the “misrepresentation card” would have worked, if he were half the public speaker as Mr. Taylor is.
True, he can’t remember what he said last year, but yet he can remember things from over 8 years ago. I keeping hearing people say he’s credible, and that the prosecution witnesses were paid, this and that. But people forget that this guy was also a rebel alongside CT, who was given citizenship and given a post he probably wouldn’t have got if he was in Gambia by CT. He got a chance to follow the trial, before being asked to testify. He’s loyal to CT, and is willing to do anything to save him.
Madman,
Let’s face the facts here, many of the witnesses who testified for the prosecutor were rebels who were scared that they might get charge if they were to say anything different than Mr. Taylor supported the RUF! But with these witnesses testifying for the defense team, they have nothing to worry about instead they want to say the true because Mr. Taylor is no threat to their lives. Why don’t we give credit to what they are saying? If any of these defense witnesses were to say Mr. Taylor did support the RUF with weapons and man, you wasn’t going to believe him? So what’s your problem? Is it that hate this man so much that you just can’t stand true justice being done to him? Common brother, we need to be open mimded here and see what have been going on through out this trial!
Mr. Smythe was send to protect Charles Taylor’s life so he will do any thing to save his life.
So what do you expect from this Gambian-liberian? He is welling to die for Charles.
TRUST ME HE IS DOIING JUST WHAT IS RIGHT.IF IT WAS THE OTHER WAY AROUND,U WILL BE DOING ALMOST THE SAME.LOL
John Thompson & All,
On a whole this was a good witness for the defense. If Mr. Koumijan had not found any inconsistencies in the witnesses statement this would be the first time in jurisprudence history. Does it matter whether Smythe said he was on the front line during Octupus but didn’t fight or he did fight. The fact of the matter is that he was there and he didn’t deny this. What does that have to do with Sierra Leone ? If we agree that once a witness statements differs from what he may have said during preparation then all the prosecution witnesses would be discredited. So stop grabbing for straws!
Aki,
Mr. Koumjain tried his best but it was not good enough….
The score reads Mr. Koumjain 0 vs Mr Smythe 2.
Homorous charing by the prosecution. If this is the prosecution standard to discredit defense witnesses, then this case is over in favor of the defense. Because all of the prosecution witnesses contradicted themselves in their substantive evidence, not just misstatements. Yanks might have mispoken or his accounts were not recorded properly but on the whole he was a crediblity witness. In some areas, he discussed more details then Mr. Taylor but that does not represent contradiction. Only one area that I thought the witness testimony needed further examination. That was when he said that he did not see human skulls at the NPFL gates. It is possible he did not see it but I thought the prosecution was going to further explore this area to understand why did not see those skulls.
On the whole, Mr Yanks Smythe was a good witness who answered questions directly, if Mr. Taylor had responded directly to questions like Mr. Smythe did, the prosecution would not have found those socalled contradictions. Mr. Taylor offered more information voluntarily than he was asked. But this contracdition does not demonstrate the Taylor sponsored war in SL. It is all a smoke screen and nothing real.
Concerning these sensational headlines from Alpha regarding contractions and problems with the defense. Did Alpha report in this same manner when the prosecution presented their case. I did not read these types of headlines. But I will await for an example from Alpha or Tracey to disporove my assertion.
Hi King Gray — just to answer your question: it is hard to compare our reporting from prosecution to defense cases, as we fundamentally changed our style between the two. We were really doing three posts a day largely of an informal transcript during the prosecution case, and then thought it would be more user-friendly to switch to the current style. I can assure you, though, King Gray, Alpha and I are trying very hard to present the informationn in a way that is as balanced and fair as possible.
Best,
Tracey
ITIS SO SHAMEFUL AT TIME WHEN PEOPLE WHO CLAIM TO KNOW LAW LOOK THE PTHER WAY.IT IS TRUE THAT WE ALL LOOK AT THIS CASE ON DIFFERENCES.SOME PEOPLE VIEW THIS CASE AS BEEN IT TAYLOR INTREAST AND OTHER SEE IT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.IN SHORT AFRICIA HAS A VERY LONG WAY TO GO.WHEN THE WHITE MAN IS ALWAYS USING US TO ALWAYS GO ANAINS EACH OTHER ONLY TO KEEP THEM RICH AND HAPPY.PEOPLE OF LS,YOUR KNOW VERY WELL THAT TAYLOR WAS NEVER THE PROVIDER FOR YOUR CONFLICT BUT, YOUR JUST TRYING TO FIND A WAY OUT.BUT IAM GOING TO LEAVE IT AS IT IS AND LET GOD BE THE JUDGE.HOPE AT THE END OF THE DAY THE PEOPLE OF SL AN LIB CAN STILL BE ON BIG HAPPY FAMILY AND ALLOW GOD TO KEEP HELPING THOS THAT HAVE NO ONE TO CRY ON.LET THE BEST MAN WIN.LONG LIVE GHANKAY.ABOVE ALL ELSE THE PEOPLE
ALL THAT I CAN SAY IS A BIG THANK YOU TO MR. SMYTHE. YOU ARE 100% BETTER THAN SOME OF THE SO-CALLED AFRICIANS ON THIS SITE WHO ONLY WISH FOR THE DEATH OF MR. TAYLOR FOR EVIL THAT THEY DID AGAINST THEIR OWN PEOPLE IN SIERRA LEONE. NO MY PEOPLE, YOU SHOULD TAKE RESPONSIBILITY OF YOR CRAZYNESS. BRAVO SMYTHE YOU ARE INDEED A TRUE FREEDON FIGHTHER. MOJA / NPP FOREVER AND EVER IN JESUS NAME.
Regards
Harris K Johnson
Harris,
You are right,when the war finished we thought we will reconcile with each other and the craziness will stop,well, Mr Blair & Mr Bush decided they will decide when this madness stop’s,hence encouraging Sierra leone to forment emnimity with our neighbour in liberia (How i wish we stop this)….. i think the west wants country vs country war in Africa not civil war….but we know …we know your game mad,bad men from the west and stupid weak men from West Africa…..but for you stupid weak men from Africa you are the minority these days indeed you are…Western European will always praise you….but we won’t let you win !!!!We will fight against maintaning the sell out clause that some Africans believes is the way to prospeperity
Hi John Sayee — I received a comment from you today at 2:39am but alas I cannot publish it in its current form. I need you to revise it so that it is clear that it is your opinion that the person that you refer to committed crimes and why you have tht opinion, in order for it to fit with our legal obligations under our comments policy. You can find our policy for comments here, which shoudl help explain the problem: http://www.charlestaylortrial.org/2010/02/02/an-update-what-is-our-policy-for-comments/
Once you revise and resubmit in alignment with this policy, I will happily publish your comment. Just let me know if you nee dme to send you your comment by email.
Best,
Tracey