Charles Taylor’s defense witness today denied that he was taking bribes in exchange for evidence.
The protected Gambian witness, whose evidence was suspended on March 10, 2010 to give prosecutors more time to prepare for his cross-examination, took the stand again today. Prosecution counsel, Nicholas Koumjian, raised concerns about the amount of money the witness was receiving, and the possibility that the funds acted as an incentive for him to testify for the former president.
The witness, prosecutors said, has received 11,000 USD in total from the Daily Subsistence Allowance (DSA) provided to him by the court since he arrived in The Hague to testify for Mr. Taylor. Mr. Koumjian also pointed out that the witness was lodged at one of the best hotels in The Netherlands.
The witness denied the prosecution allegation, saying that his Daily Subsistence Allowance (DSA) and accommodation should not be looked at as a bribe to testify for Mr. Taylor.
“To my knowledge, all what I am receiving is for my subsistence while I am here in The Netherlands and it is not money that has been given to me as a bribe,” the witness said.
“It is a fact that most of the witnesses that have come here do not stay in hotels,” Mr. Koumjian responded, prompting Mr. Taylor’s defense counsel, Courtenay Griffiths, to object to the line of questioning on the ground that the prosecution’s suggestion “is totally unfair and uncalled for.”
“Moses Blah, the Vice President of Liberia, stayed in the same hotel that Yanks Smythe [Mr. Taylor’s first defense witness] stayed in and received DSA from the Witness and Victims Service (WVS). The suggestion that there is something, somehow, something improper about this witness receiving DSA, coming out of the mouth of Mr. Koumjian, in my submission, is totally erroneous and false,” Mr. Griffiths argued.
Mr. Koumjian also highlighted contradictions in the witness’ testimony with that of Mr. Taylor, specifically about the arrest of nationals of contributing countries to the Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) peacekeeping forces in Liberia. In July 2009, Mr. Taylor testified that Nigerian nationals were picked up by his National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL) rebel group when ECOMOG forces started bombing NPFL territories in Liberia. The current witness has told the court that no West African nationals were arrested by the NPFL. Mr. Koumjian sought to know who was telling lies between Mr. Taylor and the witness.
“So Mr. Witness, who is the liar: Mr. Taylor when he says he did begin the process of picking up nationals of contributing countries and targeting Nigerians, or you?” Mr. Koumjian asked the witness.
In his response, the witness said that “now, if Taylor is lying, you can prove him to be lying but what I am telling you is the truth and I want you to understand that.”
Before court adjourned today, the judges granted permission for the witness to visit Mr. Taylor at his detention facility after the conclusion of his testimony. While prosecutors did not object to the visit, they asked that a detention facility representative be present at the meeting between the two men.
The witness’ cross-examination continues on Monday.
Hi Tracey,
I didn’t get to see the live trial for today. I am curious to know which way did the judges ruled. Was Mr. Griffith’s objection sustained or overruled?
“It is a fact that most of the witnesses that have come here do not stay in hotels,” Mr. Koumjian responded, prompting Mr. Taylor’s defense counsel, Courtenay Griffiths, to object to the line of questioning on the ground that the prosecution’s suggestion “is totally unfair and uncalled for.”
“Moses Blah, the Vice President of Liberia, stayed in the same hotel that Yanks Smythe [Mr. Taylor’s first defense witness] stayed in and received DSA from the Witness and Victims Service (WVS). The suggestion that there is something, somehow, something improper about this witness receiving DSA, coming out of the mouth of Mr. Koumjian, in my submission, is totally erroneous and false,” Mr. Griffiths argued.
Big B — Good question. Once I get hold of the transcript, I will put in the direct quotes of the interchange on this so we can follow it. Should be by Monday.
Best,
Tracey
Mr. Koumjian is simply trying to get back at the defense for what Courtenay Griffiths said on this blog about the prosectution witnesses being paid. The present defense witness has been in the Hauge since the early part of March. Paying for his hotel bills and other living allowances in the Hauge it is easy to see how those expenses have totaled $11,000.00 or more. This is not money going into his pockets like the prosecution witnesses who had childredn school fess, medical bills, rent, transportaion paid for in some cases for over a year.
This is realy another major point of contrast between the defendant and his witness. The rounding up and molestation of ECOMOG soldiers, at Mr. Taylor’s Comand, right before operation Octopus is a phase of the liberian war that can and must not be forgotten even if you wish to paint CT white before God and Man.
This is just another indication of how frustrated the defense council is now; call anything white even if it’s as black as charcoal, nail anything even if it’s a granite.
Well, for those who think Taylor will be set free because the prosecution has not brought fort sufficient evidence to find him guilty , have you puzzled out whether the defense have been or will be able to disprove the ‘little evidence’ brought fort by the prosecution council?
Vem,
As far as we are concerned, Ecomog was an occupational force. They invaded and occupied our country illegally. They killed our people and humiliated us in our own country. However, President Taylor did the best thing by opposing and fighting these invaders. Pretty tell me, what was the Status of Forces Agreement signed in 1990 when the came and slaughtered us for free? Are you aware of all of the different warring factions they helped formed that also prolonged our suffering? Haven’t you heard testimonies in this court of how Ecomomg was selling arms and ammunition to various warring factions? Do you think we have forgtton those dirty deals?
THANK GOD FOR TAYLOR.
Vem,
I don’t think you were in liberia before or during octopus. Where were you when ECOMOG had ULIMO dress up in her ( ECOMOG ) uniform and transported them from the Sierra Leonean border and droped them along the road to Po river bridge, there by giving ULIMO the opportunity to captured from the Sierra Leonean border to Monrovia in one day time?
Where you when the Guinean ECOMOG used to Monrovia at night to attack NPFL position at ST. Paul outside Monrovia while NPFL was fighting ULIMO?
Where were you when the Senegalese ECOMOG allowed ULIMO settle in the areas NPFL gave to be used for buffer Zone between Sierra Leone and Liberia?
Now the point here is that, what happened in Liberia shouldn’t be the evidences used for the Sierra Leonean case because it had nothing to do with Sierra Leone. Unless where the trial have changed to a special court for Liberia. This case is a joke to fool the people of Sierra Leone….. Shame ,shame, shame, and SHAME on this socalled international inJustice system!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Folks,
I believe we are revisiting the issue of witnesses being bribed to falsely testify under oath. If I can recall, the defense quizzed a few of the prosecution witnesses about this and there were endless diatribes of foul play by some commentators on this website. I remember a month or so ago questioning one of our commentators who raised the issue of bribery how did he know the prosecution witnesses were bribed. His answer was emphatic: they admitted that they were taken care of at The Hague (this is not verbatim). So now we know that witnesses are provided financial inducements because, I suppose, many of them can not even afford the airfare to The Hague, let alone spend a week living in a hotel or motel in a major European city. So it was not just the prosecution witnesses who benefited from court allowed financial inducements but defense witnesses as well and I think the subject matter is clear as of today’s transcript – witnesses to all parties concerned are “taken care of” at the expense of the court or perhaps its liaison office in charge of logistics and accommodation…and the daily stipend is no small dough given the standard of living in the countries from which these witnesses come…big bucks.
That said; let me speak to another issue. Here is an excerpt from the transcript: “So Mr. Witness, who is the liar: Mr. Taylor when he says he did begin the process of picking up nationals of contributing countries and targeting Nigerians, or you?” Mr. Koumjian asked the witness. In his response, the witness said that “now, if Taylor is lying, you can prove him to be lying but what I am telling you is the truth and I want you to understand that.”
(cf Daily Summary – March 19, 2010 “Witness Was Not Bribed To Testify For Charles Taylor, He Says”). Can we say the witness knows more than CT? CT has already established a fact which this witness seriously contradicts. According to him, his “truth” is the truth, not CT’s factual statement…and this guy is testifying for CT. What a day!
Peace.
For posting, Tracey, typo errors in the first post. Delete first post.
Noko7,
The payments of so-call lost wages, the payment of rent, the payment of school fees for the the prosecution witnesses and not for the defense witnesses is bribery. There is no other way to put it. There is no amount of embellishment to suggest that the two opposing side were treated equally. Now with your cherry picking excerpt, it is not what we consider as bribery. In the sense that witnesses hotel stay in the Hague, food provided for them in the Hague, and transporting them to and from court. This is not what we are talking about. What we are talking abou is bribery is giving people or relocating prosecution witnesses to a developed and well organized country(Europe and America) in exchange for lying testimony for the prosecution as a means of inducement or incentive.
Secondly Noko7, there is no contradiction here between the witness and President Taylor. You wish there was at least one for you to jump all over it as a means to put some meat oN the dry bones of this grosteque and dismal case. However, I love the witness respond to Mr. koumjian. He said “IF” Taylor is lying, you can prove him to be lying. YOU DARN RIGHT MR. WITNESS. I SAY NOKO7 “IF” YOU THINK TAYLOR IS LYING PROVE IT.
Right on Mr. Witness. You too good brother. I love your tenacity. We want more of it. We need mor of it. And certainl, we like more of it. Stick to your store. Well, Noko7, there you have it. The witness said to Mr. Koumjian, “IF” Taylor is lying, PROVE IT MR. PROSECUTION. I SAY, PROVE IT MR. NOKO7.
Cousin 7,
Not the same…..the man was brought from Africa and hosted by the Special Court..compare that to the prosecutors paying and buying someone’s RENT, KIDS SCHOOLS, FOOD, MEDICINES and asking them to go get MORE people to come be witness. If I told you that the prosecutors gave me X, Y & Z and if you testify, you will get the same….isn’t that bribery??
An evil minded man will forever remain evil. Mr. Koumjian thinks the defense will bribe witnesses because his team did the same. Sorry sir, the defense is far responsible than what you think. The evil that you planted against this man will surly chase you for the rest of your career as a lawyer. You must be ashamed of yourself for asking such question.
Harris K Johnson
Hi Harris — I do understand you did not like the implications of the question, but this is just a quick note to say that I think the question was within the realms of what is allowed for lawyers to do in the courtroom — as if the lawyers do step beyond the bounds of what is allowed, the judges will usually let the lawyers know. I’ve promised Big B earlier that we’ll post the exchange from the transcript when we get it early next week, so we’ll see exactly how the judges handled it then.
Best,
Tracey
Today we are happy that the former president of Liberia is standing trial in hague but what we want in Liberia is free, fair and transperent Trial. and i think i got confidence in the judges and we will watching closly to see the final Vredict.
and are will be very happy with any ruling that comes from the court.
best regards
an i will be very happy with the ruling
Are you my George Flomo from the Great Booker Washington Institute.. Cause you write briliant stuff and uh, sorry so say this, but it is like Fallah Menjor at all. Just checking..
No need to even SCORE this but I will….Mr. Koumjian 0 vs Mr. Taylor 3. Nothing was gained under cross. Few EYES openers that lead to a DEAD END.
Mr. Koumjian is a real joke. Is staying in the hotel a paid? Is the money going in the wtiness pocket? This is not the same like the prosecution witnesses who were given monies in Africa to encourage them to testify against Mr. Taylor. This witness had already agreed to testify for the defense, he does not live in the Hague , so it make sense for the defense to provide food, shelter , and transporation for him.
On the issue of West African nationals and the witness statement. The witness was very clear in his statement that from his position and his location, he did not see or know or hear about the arrest of foriegn nationals. So this is no contradiction. If the man did not know about such a thing it does not mean that he is lying. This prosecution is a joke!
King G,
He truly believe he’s a US Court….but he’s not dealing with some fool. The man told him what he knew but he turns around cry CONTRADICTION.
I sometimes if they were working for the defense, what will be their take on some of these NONSENSE.
King Gray,
Don’t blame Mr. Koumjian for equating the bribery of the prosecution witness with the food, and hotels, that the court is providing for the defense witness as bribe. Mr. Koumjian is looking for moral equivocation for the serious character flaw of the prosecution’s behavior. He is embarrassed for the bribery behavior, that’s why he is basically saying what he is saying about the defense. This man is looking in the past through the present. But we will not be snookered again. These kinds of behavior by the prosecution is like a schoolyard bully. They are pompous cowards and don’t want to take responsibility for the own action and behavior. And it is about time that someone calls it out, and that someone is me, Jose Rodriguez.
Fallah,
Don’t be happy. I meant NOT ..ok