In his second week on the witness stand, a former Sierra Leonean rebel leader convicted of mass crimes during Sierra Leone’s brutal 11-year conflict pointed away from Mr. Taylor when speaking about support provided to his forces by outsiders. This week, the witness said that the Ivorian government helped his rebel group much more than the former Liberian president in terms of housing for his troops, and that West African leaders – not Mr. Taylor acting unilaterally — decided to remove one of his rebel colleagues from Sierra Leone when he became a hindrance to the country’s peace process.
On Monday, Issa Hassan Sesay, former interim leader of Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebel group told the court that from 1996 to around 2000, the Ivorian government provided housing facilities where RUF leader Foday Sankoh was based together with his special adviser David Kallon and an RUF radio operator Memunatu Deen.
Prosecutors have long maintained that Mr. Taylor supported and controlled the RUF rebels during the conflict in Sierra Leone, including the provision of a guesthouse in the Liberian capital, Monrovia, sometime in the late 1990s. The guesthouse, according to prosecutors, served as a residence for RUF commanders when they brought diamonds to Liberia for Mr. Taylor to exchange for arms and ammunition. Mr. Taylor himself has admitted that sometime in the late 1990s, he indeed provided a guesthouse for the RUF in Monrovia – but it was solely to facilitate meetings geared towards bringing the conflict in Sierra Leone to an end. On Monday, Mr. Sesay testified that another government – the Ivorian one – was far more supportive to the RUF than Mr. Taylor was, at least in terms of places for his rebel forces to stay.
“Mr. Sesay, what was the distinction between the assistance provided by the Government of Ivory Coast to the RUF and the assistance provided by the Government of Liberia?” Mr. Taylor’s lead defense lawyer, Courtenay Griffiths, asked Mr. Sesay.
“Well, the Ivorian government provided housing for the RUF from 1996, so they provided accommodation for a longer period that the Liberian government,” Mr. Sesay responded.
He said that the RUF maintained the residence in Ivory Coast until the year 2000.
When asked about which RUF officials occupied the house in Ivory Coast, Mr. Sesay explained that “it was Mr. Sankoh who was there, but when they arrested Mr. Sankoh in Nigeria, his adviser Pa Kallon was there.
“When they both [Sankoh and Kallon] returned to Sierra Leone in 1999, Mr. Sankoh’s wife Josephine Tengbeh was there up to 2000 with some wounded soldiers,” Mr. Sesay said.
Was there a radio operator based at those premises from 1996 to 2000?” Mr. Griffiths asked Mr. Sesay.
“It did not go up to 2000 — but up to 1998 an operator was there and it was that operator who left and moved to Liberia,” Mr. Sesay said. “She was Memunatu Deen.”
He added that Ms. Deen returned to Sierra Leone at some point in 1998, but that during the signing of the peace agreement between the Sierra Leonean government and the RUF in Togo in 1999, she was again deployed at the guesthouse in Abidjan. She was subsequently relocated to the RUF guesthouse in Monrovia, Mr. Sesay said.
As prosecutors have alleged that Mr. Taylor served as the main source of support for the RUF, defense lawyers now seek to establish that the RUF received assistance from several other sources, including foreign governments and West African peacekeepers. In Mr. Sesay’s testimony, he has pointed out that the RUF did not receive assistance from Mr. Taylor but rather from officials in Burkina Faso who supplied them with arms and ammunition, and Ivory Coast where he says that housing was provided to the RUF leadership.
Mr. Sesay also on Monday testified about diamonds that were given to him in 1998 and which went missing while he was in Liberia. According to prosecutors, Mr. Sesay had taken these diamonds to Mr. Taylor in Liberia — an account which Mr. Sesay has denied. The former RUF leader has said that he was on transit in Liberia on his way to Burkina Faso where the diamonds were to be used to purchase arms and ammunition. He explained that RUF commander, Sam Bockarie, instructed Ms. Deen to pick up Mr. Sesay in Sierra Leone and take him to Liberia to meet RUF associate, Ibrahim Bah. Mr. Bah was to eventually take Mr. Sesay to Burkina Faso where the diamonds were to be delivered and arms and ammunition collected, Mr. Sesay said on Monday. (Prosecutors allege that Mr. Bah was a close associate of Mr. Taylor).
“She [Memunatu Deen] was instructed by Bockarie to come to Kailahun. The purpose for her to come when Bockarie called her was to take me to meet Ibrahim Bah. Ibrahim Bah was to meet us in Monrovia so that we can go to Burkina Faso,” Mr. Sesay.
The diamonds eventually went missing in Monrovia and were never given to Mr. Bah, Mr. Sesay said.
Mr. Sesay refuted suggestions that the diamonds were to be taken to Mr. Taylor, saying that if that were to be the case, he would not have taken several days carrying the diamonds in Monrovia when they eventually went missing.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sesay told the court that atrocities committed during the 11-year conflict in Sierra Leone increased when the RUF teamed up with disgruntled members the Sierra Leone armed forces after a 1997 military coup in Sierra Leone.
In May 1997, members of the Sierra Leone army overthrew the elected government of Sierra Leone and formed the Armed Forces Ruling Council (AFRC). The soldiers invited RUF rebels and together, the two groups formed a junta regime which ruled Sierra Leone from May 1997 to February 1998 when they were forcefully removed from the country’s capital Freetown. As the two groups withdrew to the country’s hinterland, they committed atrocities, culminating in the infamous rebel invasion of Freetown in January 1999, an attack which Mr. Sesay has said was undertaken solely by the AFRC with no RUF involvement. As Mr. Sesay continued his testimony on Tuesday, he told the court that the massive increase in the commission of atrocities took place because the RUF joined up with the AFRC. These atrocities, Mr. Sesay said were committed mainly by the AFRC soldiers who had themselves become a rebel faction in the country. Mr. Sesay explained to the court the kinds of crimes that were committed once the AFRC joined forces with the RUF.
“Well, we are talking about amputations, burning down of houses, killing of civilians, and those were the practices they did upto the time they entered Freetown,” Mr. Sesay said.
“And when they entered Freetown, they continued the same practice, they captured people forcefully, they asked them to carry their loads for them, they amputated civilians, burned and killed civilians, burnt down police stations, killed police men, such things,” he added.
Prosecutors alleged that the Mr. Taylor was involved in a joint criminal enterprise with both the RUF and AFRC rebels and that it was in pursuit of such a common plan that the rebel forces invaded Freetown in January 1999. Prosecutors say that while the rebel forces were in Freetown in 1999, the high command of the RUF gave regular updates of their activities to Mr. Taylor and his Director of Special Security Services (SSS) Benjamin Yeaten, both of whom allegedly congratulated the rebels for their success in invading the country’s capital. Mr. Taylor has denied these allegations. According to Mr. Sesay, when the AFRC forces invaded Freetown in 1999, they did not communicate with RUF commanders until they got into Freetown and needed extra help from the RUF, a help which Mr. Sesay said never came in.
The AFRC, Mr. Sesay said, held a grudge against the RUF leadership because they believed “we were responsible for their being driven from Freetown because they said if we had reinforced them, they wouldn’t have driven them from Freetown.”
On Wednesday, Mr. Sesay said that the decision to relocate a fellow RUF commander Sam Bockarie from Sierra Leone to Liberia in 1999 to promote peace in the war-torn country was not taken by Mr. Taylor alone, but rather by West African leaders acting jointly.
Mr. Sesay explained that after the RUF signed a peace agreement with the Sierra Leonean government in 1999, Mr. Bockarie, who was one of the rebels’ top commanders, resisted disarmament. Mr. Bockarie then moved to Liberia. According to Mr. Sesay, a meeting in of Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) leaders – including Nigeria’s former president, Olusegun Obasanjo — decided it was best for Mr. Bockarie to stay in Liberia as he had become a hindrance to the peace process in Sierra Leone. This information was told to Mr. Sesay, he said, by the rebels’ then leader, Mr. Sankoh.
In his statements to the Special Court on Wednesday, and consistent with his testimony since taking the witness stand last week, Mr. Sesay continued to distance Mr. Taylor from the Sierra Leonean rebel group — and from prosecution charges that the former Liberian president controlled the RUF and its actions.
“He [Sankoh] went to Monrovia and they had a meeting about Sam Bockarie’s issue and that himself, president Taylor, president Obasanjo of Nigeria attended that meeting and they decided, because Sam Bockarie was an obstacle in respect of the Lome Peace Accord, Sam Bockarie should stay in Liberia and Foday Sankoh should implement the peace process,” Mr. Sesay told the court.
“Was the decision for Sam Bockarie to go to Liberia made by Charles Taylor alone as alleged by this prosecution?” Mr. Griffiths asked Mr. Sesay.
“No, it was not Charles Taylor’s singular decision,” Mr. Sesay responded. “Obasanjo was involved in the decision for Bockarie to stay in Monrovia, including Mr. Sankoh,”
When asked whether Mr. Bockarie had gone to Liberia “on the invitation of Charles Taylor,” Mr. Sesay said “No.”
“Sam Bockarie went there because he had a quarrel with Mr. Sankoh. He knew that what he was doing was a bad thing that is why he left to go to Liberia because he knew that if we had met him, we would have disciplined him,” Mr. Sesay said.
Mr. Sesay also explained that when Mr. Sankoh was arrested in May 2000, after having ordered RUF fighters to abduct United Nations peacekeepers in Sierra Leone, Mr. Taylor sent his Director of Special Security Services (SSS) Benjamin Yeaten to invite Mr. Sesay to a meeting with him (Taylor) in Liberia. Mr. Sesay said that upon arriving in Monrovia, Mr. Taylor was very angry about the action of the RUF.
“He [Taylor] looked very angry,” Mr. Sesay told the court.
“He [Taylor] said if Foday Sankoh and I thought that we can fight the UN — He said that other people will be thinking now, like America and Britain, they will be thinking now that this is the handy work of Charles Taylor but as long as God almighty knows that my hands are clean,” Mr. Sesay continued.
He said Mr. Taylor informed him that he had received a mandate from West African leaders that “he should talk to the RUF to facilitate the release of the peacekeepers.”
Prosecutors allege that since Mr. Taylor was in control of the RUF, he used his powers over the rebels to secure the release of the peacekeepers. Mr. Taylor has insisted that he was only acting on the instructions of other West African leaders. Mr. Sesay, as he testified on Wednesday, supported Mr. Taylor’s position.
“Was he [Taylor] talking to you because he was in control of the RUF or because he had a mandate from the guarantors of the peace process,” Mr. Griffiths asked Mr. Sesay.
“He talked to me because he had mandate from the guarantors but he was not controlling the RUF. RUF was under the control of Mr. Sankoh,” Mr. Sesay said.
The witness said that his meeting with Mr. Taylor after the abduction of the UN peacekeepers was the first time he had spoken to or met with the former president.
On Thursday and Friday, the court took early adjournments because Mr. Taylor’s defense counsel Mr. Griffiths was indisposed and could not be present in court. The court also commenced a one week judicial recess on Friday in accordance with the Special Court for Sierra Leone’s judicial calendar which indicates that the court will observe a one week summer recess from July 19 to 23 2010.
Also in court on Friday, it was established that the much anticipated appearance by British Supermodel Naomi Campbell may no longer take place on the July 29, 2010. Prosecution counsel Nicholas Koumjian informed the judges that the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) had received a call from representatives of Ms. Campbell that they wanted her appearance to be rescheduled. The representatives are supposed to communicate with the court in writing indicating when exactly Ms. Campbell will appear. Mr. Koumjian, however, stated that the rescheduled date will not be very far from the originally scheduled July 29 date and that in any case, the testimonies of Ms. Campbell, along with her friend Mia Farrow and former agent Carole White will be heard before the former RUF leader Mr. Sesay concludes his testimony.
Wadi William,
Not understanding why an omnipotent God will allow some things to happen is a pointer to the fact that we are human and He is God. Not being omniscience is part of our humanness while ultimate freedom to act or not act is mark of divinity.
If the contradictions of life and the defiances of common sense by everyday experiences can be called inherent absurdity than life itself as we understand it is a ridiculous superstition.
We call Him God because that is whom He is. If He ceases to be God because He didn’t intervene when our children were been Raped & slaughtered, our mothers and fathers were been butchered and so many of our people were been tormented and tortured then He will ceases to be God every time someone foolishly try breaking the laws of nature (i.e, careless jumping from the top of a high building and hoping that God will suspend him in mid air).
The better questions to ask is: why are we so mean to ourselves? Why were we ignorant to the fact that there can never be a good war and a bad peace? Why did we place our trust in so-called liberators despite the great book warning “never place your trust in a man”? Why were we so slow in seeing the deceits of our career politicians and their unholy alliances with warlords? Why should you want us to reap where/ what we didn’t sow?
We would do best to reflect on the following:
Ethnic groups lived peacefully together for centuries but needed Doe, Taylor and Cohorts to inform them that they can’t live peacefully together.
We deliberately keep our people ignorant and illiterate but expect them to make wise and informed decisions.
We keep on being selfish, lazy and doing the same foolish things over and again but expect different and good results.
We may not fully understand why God didn’t prevent our war and we are saddened that those terrible atrocities were allowed to occur but ,unless you think we are robots,, we should take 100% responsibility for our actions and inactions.
Were there not sufficient warnings and signals that we as a people were heading a dangerous path? Are we so foolish to have allowed a handful of persons to reign terror on our beloved country?
My brother, God created the universe and allowed it to operate on laws and He created us with the ability(brains) to understand these laws and to abide by them ( we are no robots). Attempting breaking these laws have consequences and everyone must bear the consequences of his actions.
The war in our country was not quirk of fate but the reaping of the fruits of disunity, greeds, selfishness, ignorance, illiteracy and laziness we sowed for over a century. If we want peace we must plant the seed of peace. If we want a great country we must do the hard work needed for building a great nation. God have already given us life, vast natural resources, rich soil, enough rainfall and sunshines, energetic and intelligent people. What else, should He do before you can acknowledge His goodness? No, He will not do for us what we can do for ourselves.
Let me leave you with two sayings from the great Book:
Be yea not deceive, for God is not mock whatsoever you sow so should you reap
Righteousness exalts a nation. Sin is a reproach to any people
Reply
Tracey,
Just want to say thanks for the summaries these days. Its been very balanced, although we’ve had some disagreements in the past, but I must admit its been really balance and more detail. It has save me time from reading the entire transcripts on a daily basic. Thumbs up to Alpha too cuz he gets all the thrashing Lol !!!!!!!
Is this witness still here, can he provide new information.
Taylor did not do anything is getting a bit old, since the defense supporters are looking for substantial evidence to prove Taylor’s innocence, I think it’s time that Sessay as involved as he was in RUF affair to start producing non-circumstantial evidence that will acquit Taylor of all charges. Other then that these continous testimonies are getting redundant.
Ms Teage,
We all wanted to know…..we got someone who was there, in the middle of some of the charges…..THE LINK!!!! And as we listen to him back by FACTUAL DOCUMENTS, he’s telling us HOW and WHY some of those actions were formatted.
You have to understand the relationship between the times and the events; yes is taking forever but if you on trial, you will want your lawyer to dot all I(s) and cross all T(s). From what I am gathering, he is to some degrees giving Mr. Sesay MAYBE the chance he didnt’ have in his….for what I see, his lawyer didn’t do a good job.
So tell me and give me your HONESTY answer……is Mr. Griffith turning the case into a swizz cheese??
Ms. Teage;
I understand your fraustration…however, it is the job of the prosecution to establish and prove guilt, thus providing evidence. For all we’ve seen the prosecution is at best kinda doing nothing as we expect them according to law maybe the don’t have the power as prosecutors. And we all know that without Corpus delicti Taylor’s a free man.
@ Ms. Teage ( law school?…really?)
DIRECT EVIDENCE V. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Direct evidence proves that something is factual without inference or assumption.
Circumstantial evidence is evidence in a case which can be used to draw inferences about a series of events.
FYI: in circumstantial evidence cases(as we have here), it is the job of the defense to show that the same circumstances could be explained by an alternative theory.
Wait for IT?……
Case in point, providing housing for the RUF was it for the exchange of diamonds or to facilitate the peace process? Mr. Sesay said it was to facilitate the peace process(circumstantial and YESSS permitted…go figure?)
BURDEN OF PROOF IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL
The prosecution has the burden of proof not the defense.
ps. just some basic things one learns in their first! year of law school or doing an internet search.( I did)
HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY LIBERIA!!!
Braking news, no money to hunt Mr. Taylor’s hidden millions. What a shame?
REgards
Harris K Johnson
Harry,
You’re JOKING right??? So all the NONSENSE we heard about 5 BILLION was a joke?? Really, with all the fund spend to prosecute this one man, we get this?? No more money to hunt Mr. Taylor’s BILLIONS??? Did he send it to the moon??
Noko4,
This is not a joke as you think. The statement came from a senior court officer when she visited Monrovia and spoke to the press. However, she is convidence that justice will be served. She concluded by saying that this trial shows that no sitting president is above the law. As for the much talked about billion, the court does not have money to unearth such a huge amount of cash.
Harris K Johnson
Ha ha ha…..you got me FARTING. I pray that JUSTICE will be served…..TRUE JUSTICE is all we ask for; No one is ABOVE the laws neither no one is BELOW the laws.
To LIE about something that was not there is a CRIME if you ask Ms. Senior Court Officer….we have yet to see a CREDIBLE evidence or link in this case if I should remind you.
Haha Harris…what if there is absolutely no millions??
Harris,,
WHAT?!?!?…Say that again…….
Was Sam Bokarie right about ECOMOG arresting RUF? Will this kind of situation promote peace in Africa? Here is portion of Issa Sessay evidence in open court:
Q. And so you decided to pause there to contact Mr Sankoh in
Freetown. Did you contact Foday Sankoh?
A. Yes. Just as my operator assembled the radio, and he put
the radio on, whilst he was calling Mr Sankoh’s station it was
then that Sam Bockarie’s radio operator called – intercepted and
called, and that was Daf and when Daf called he said Bockarie
wanted to speak to me. So the operator then said that Bockarie
wanted to talk to me. So as he, Bockarie, came on the mic, he
said you, he – he insulted me at first and he said, “I do not
blame you.” He said, “It’s because Alambo and others – it’s
because Alambo and others did not execute my instruction.” He
said, “By now you would have been a dead man.”
Q. What else was said by him, if anything?
A. Yes. He said, “It’s because Alambo and others did not
implement my orders.” He said by now I would have been a dead
man. A dead man. He said, he told me that I should not follow
Foday Sankoh to go by his instruction, ECOMOG would arrest all of
us, and he said he would never disarm to ECOMOG so I too – we
insulted each other on the radio and then I told the radio – the
radio operator to shut off the radio. And then we moved and went
to Kono and when I got to Kono that was when I sent a message to
Mr Sankoh.
My good people who loves justice,
Here is an extract of the transcript of the first interview Issa Sessay had with the prosecution. this was extracted from page 29357 (hand written pagination) of the prosecution response to defence application to exclude custodial statements of Issa Sessay.
They were actually assisting Issa Sessay to fill a form here:
Q. Good . Now we continue as saying :
“Are you willinq to waive the right to counsel and proceed with the interview and pre paration of a witness statement ; yes or no?” In other words, are you willing to disc uss with us your involvement? Are you willing to tell us what happened and what you know of these events ?
A. Ye s , si r .
Q . Yes ?
A. Yes , si r .
Q. And again , put your initial .
[Th e i nt e r vi e we e c ompl ie s ]
Lovers of Justice please tell me: were the prosecutor said above “In other words, are you willing to discuss with us your involvement? Are you willing to tell us what happened and what you know of these events ?” does it accurately translate the question relating to waiver of right to counsel? I submit that that translation was misleading and Issa Sessay did not understand what the question said about his right to a counsel because it was not translated to him nor was it properly explained to him since the explanation only focused on wether he wanted to talk to the prosecution and not on wether he wants to waive his right to counsel as wrongly claimed by this prosecution.
Please read the submission by both the defence and the prosecution on this matter and youy will see the desperation of this western sponsored prosecution to wrongfully convict Charles Taylor at all cost.
you can read the prosecution statement here
http://www.sc-sl.org/scsl/public/SCSL-03-01-Taylor/SCSL-03-01-T-1002.pdf
and judge for yourself wether their arguments are tenable.
Big B,
Responding to your comment July 17, 2010 at 1:18 am,,
I don’t think the Charles Taylor haters in this forum are Sierra Leoneans,most Sierra Leonean’i am sure did not think Charles Taylor is responsible for the war in Sierra Leone.If you ask a Sierra Leonenan who is responsible for the war in their country they will say Foday Sankoh.Even Mr Bangura the prosecutor and to a lesser extent Alpha who seems to be getting all the battering from you peeps do not believe that Mr Taylor is responsible..
The Sierra Leonean that were made to believes that Charles Taylor was responsible for the war are the then SLPP government lead by Mr Kabbah.The people that consider Mr Taylor to be the trouble especially if he is allowed to ride on popular fame and gain confident as a leader of Liberia and in west africa, took the opportunity to strike,Kabbah spent most of that period in Guinea as an exile government depending on the interntional community to re-instate him,so they were open to all influnces especially when the influene has took upon himself to be the paymaster.
And i suppose the opportunist Sierra Leoneans…The lawyers and journalist,these cases are opportunity for them to practice their trade,you would find there are Sierrea Leonean lawyers in the defence team too.
There where oil exploration as the war was fought,Taylor is capable of being an Hugo Chavez in the area,as you know we are comfortable with the Africans that say’ yes and stay in their pathetic places as the men that knows the value of nothing and interlectually dependant role in this planet.
Cee,
It’s a difference of opinion, which it’s all good. I still think that these Taylor haters are not Liberians but have closed ties to Liberia or the other way around, if they are Liberians they have closed ties to Sierra Leone.
One reasons for thinking that these guys are not Liberians/Sierra Leone; my investigative sense tells me from their pseudocode names. Pay close attention to their names and tell me most likely where they are from.
Anyway, it always good to have difference of opinion, if these haters were not bloggers this site will not be as interesting.
Big B, should we conclude from your name that you are probably a cousin to taylor, and in fact americo-liberian, members of the free slaves from america that resettled in West Africa in 1816, and led by Jehudi Ashmun? As for us, we were and had always been in West Africa! If this is problem to some, get over it and let’s talk about the crimes committed by your Role Model,taylor, in his involvement with criminal activities resulting in lose of lives. We are talking about rapes, murders, and gross human rights abuses that were, as alleged, committed by taylor’s support to these criminal elements of NPFL and bedfellows,RUF rebels. We are talking about lies and cover ups and witness tempering, rampant in the taylor NPFL organization during taylor’s pathetic rule of that organization. We are not worry here about people who may be related to Kabbah or have names, you believe are Sierra Leonean. this is my last time responding to this irrelevant rants from most on this blog!
lol!
Fallah,
You got me laughing today with your smart****questions to Big B. I think you are being fussy like my aunt………….
Fallah,
I now know that you have a HUMAN SIDE aka funny…..Nice picture of Big B.
Big B,
Indeed.
Noko 4,
I think its been established that a convicted murderer, rapist, madman is hardley a credible witness, hist testimony may be your bread and butter or a gospel to you all, but as far as I’m concern this man only knows how to speak lies. He lied about his involvement in the Sierra Leonean war, he did not confess even though there were sufficient evidence to charge and comvict him of atrocities committed against his own country man. So how does he translate to a credible respectful character…this man ordered and lead thousands of murders of innocent CIVILIANS. He is a monster, a liar and just another opportunist like Taylor. He says Taylor didn’t do it to every accusation yet offers no proof. Funny how his words are suffient, the words of a murdering rapist is sufficient to prove Taylor innocent yet the words of prosecution witnesses must be backed by evidence, called forth by Taylorist. This man was convicted of horrible crimes against humanity yet his cacaphony of lies are like gospel to you all because you want to hear Taylor is innocent.
Well I don’t believe a word he says and it doesn’t even matter what you and I believe what matters is what the evidence/testimony says to the judge. My opinions on this blog is just as valid as any Taylorist, and the more you fight against the more I’m going to comment. The name calling chhanges nothing.
Ms. Teage,
Is he on trial or a witness?? The answer: A WITNESS. Is he a CREDIBLE WITNESS….yes!!! WHY?? His words are been backup with and by DOCUMENTS…some of which were the prosecutors evidence in chief.
For his deeds he is paying the price but he is telling us that Mr. Taylor was NEVER EVER involved within or with the RUF as pictured by the prosecutors and that is the CRUST of the matter.
Ivory Coast hosted the RUF…..moreso than Mr. Taylor….why wasn’t that EVER mentioned??? Mr. Taylor was ASKED….he didn’t ask to be the MIDDLEMAN but was ASKED….his goodwill is what got him here!!!! Why don’t the prosecutors as those leaders of ECOWAS if he is telling the truth?? Won’t that be the quickiest way to resolve that matter??
Noko 4,
Have u heard a about a little phrase ‘witness credibility??
Je fini!
Ms. Teage,
Yes I have but it seems to be you are NOT…..the man’s words are backup by DOCUMENTS…how much CREDIBLE can that me Ms Teage??
If he was asked during his trial are you GUILTY of the charges and he said NOT GUILTY does that equal he is lieing as a witness?? Maybe he was NOT GUILTY of some of the charges….200 plus citizens that lived in the zone he controlled TESTIFIED on his behalf…..And I will believe them any day!!!!. And please don’t ask why??
@ Ms. Teage
I too have great concerns about the credibility of the witnesses used since the inception of this trial. You do know that if you were sitting as the fact finder….you would be bound to acquit Mr. Taylor. Go figure!
YET AGAIN TO ALL BLOGGERS
Taylor haters, Sierra Leonean, non-patriotic Liberian etc…what do all of these names have in common with this trail and the issues being discussed by independent bloggers? If there are people on here who ‘hate’ Taylor or who are Sierra Leoneans or are non-patriotic Liberians ,What, I ask does this have to do with the trail.
Why is it that you all can never seem to stick to the issues being discusses, you all always have to start discussing bloggers and not their opinion. If you all don’t have anything else to say about the trail or the opinions/issues being discussed then SAY NOTHING at all. Quit the childish irrelevant, unsubstantiated rants about ‘Taylor haters’ and discuss the issues the matters the facts etc….
It shows immaturity when one digresses to personal issues versus matters being discussed.
Its very obvious that there are people who love Taylor. people who hate Taylor, People who think Taylor is guilty of crimes in Liberia but not Sierra Leone and people who think he’s guilty of crimes in Sierra Leone as well as Liberia. This post has been happening for over three years. Bloggers personal opinion of Taylor, nationality character is quite irrelevant to blog points. Right now what is relevant is Mr. Sessay’s testimony can we get back to that and get off of pouncing on bloggers.
Its so frustrating when a good debate his happening and some one brings nonsense that has nothing to do with the trail.
I’m called a Taylor hater but I have no problem sitting and discussing other issues with Aki @ Kendejah, this is not about Taylorist against ‘Taylor haters’. This is just about people young and old discussing this trail. Let’s get back on track already!!!!!!!!!!
Ms Teage,
You made some interesting points, but if you want for Taylor supporters to stick to the issue, my question to you is, don’t you think that your prosecution should also stick to the issue? What does Ms Campbell has to do with this case? Is Ms Campbell is a part of the 11 counts indictment? This prosecution is wobbling all over the place looking for needle in a haystack.
Until your prosecution can seized from bringing in unnecessary and irrelevant circumstances into play, We the People, will say what we want to say, as long as we are within the guidelines of this site. So, please take your advice to the haters and leave We the People alone.
Big B,
No offense you are very educated so there’s no need to distort the matters I brought up. When I talk about sticking to the issues I am specifically talking about BLOGGERS on this site sticking to the issues and refraining from personal attacks on other BLOGGERS. I am not the prosecutor and you are NOT the defendor, we can comment on what both sides do and decisions they make, but we cannot control what they do. If you want my opinion on a decison made by the prosecutor or even the defense team I will gladly share as this is the type of dialogue we should be engaged in. But when you bodly call Liberians something else with no proof and just speculations, you bring about confusion and distractions. We can ‘worry’ or pout/diagree with what the prosecution does but we cannot change or control these situations. Where as YOU as a responsible blogger can control ur actions.
What is so sad is that you had the audocity to make the above comments. You all have in your mind have really made independent lovers of Justice, free Liberians a sector of the prosecution. The prosecution is not ‘my prosecution’ I’m in the U.S.A not the Hague and just happen to agree with their case against Taylor, I’m an independent person not paid by the prosecution…just a blogger commenting. Believe it or not I have no influence over the prosecution.
Ms Teage,
You and I are saying the same thing. The same way you do not have control over the prosecution, is the same way you don’t have control over any bloggers on this site.
I have not had the chance to witness Issa’s testimony but I wouldn’t bank too much on him been the one to let Taylor off the hook. Issa’s is convicted war criminal, who by all account denied all the atrocities commieted by the RUF and have mostly blame others for those crimes. Yet, this same court found him to be quilty of the crimes.
I don’t see how his presence and evidence can help taylor. Taylor will need to bring a witness who was not a subordinate to him and had very little involvement in the war to move his case any further than where it is. An independent professional who has good knowledge of what happed, in their capacity as doctors, humanitarian NGO or others who did independent investigation of the war by collecting evidence.
If he fails to do so, his chances of acquital despite all conspiracy theories around this forum will be almost NIL.
Personally, I will like to see Justice done and it is right that taylor is at the hague. Taylor involvement in sierra leone war was an open secret and it is up to the prosecution to show that and I hope they do and I am sure they will.
Here is a minute demonstration of the prosecution desperation to convict at all cost that they at one time took Issa Sesay from his prison cell at mid night under armed escort to compelled him to serve as a prosecution witness. Issa refused and this is why he was found guilty in the RUF trial: (see page 6 footnotes: http://www.sc-sl.org/scsl/public/SCSL-03-01-Taylor/SCSL-03-01-T-1002.pdf)
“Th ese factors cited by Trial Chamber I in paragraph 45 of the Sesay Admissibility Decision includ e: that Sesay was blindfolded and taken from his cell by armed men on 11 March 2003; that he was told he would be called as a witness for the Prosecution if he co -operated with the investigators (s uggestio ns whi ch according to Ses ays own testimony in the voir dire hearing were made a fter 10 March 2003; see RUF case, Transcript , 19 June 2007, p. 49 etseq); and that the Prose cuti on wo uld protect and care fo r Sesay’ s family (s ugges tions which acc ording to Sesays own testimon y were mad e on 12 Ma rch 2003; see RUF case. Transcript. 19 Jun e 2007. pp”””
Big B,
We are not saying the same thing. I DO NOT wish to control bloggers, My postings had nothing to do with ‘control’ you totally just made that up. My posting was about people being civil and respectful, and agreeing to disagree on the issues. I do not wish to change anybody’s mind as many minds are made up, I only desire that we quit making unecessarly, uneducated, personal attack on blogger, which also haopens to be the policy of the board.
Ms Teage,
Make is easier and point the person(s)….beating around the bush is not help…..my one cent.
Ms Teage,
With all due respect, I am not sure which policy of which board you are referring to. I don’t thing Tracey and Alpha would published any blogger comments if said comments doesn’t meet the site guidelines. So, as long as Tracey/Alpha clears a blogger’s comment, I think that’s all that matters. Everyone has the right to comment as he/she sees faith. It is your choice to be or not to be a part of a particular conversation, but to shoot down another’s person opinion as uneducated is adding more film to the fire.
Lastly, lets us leave the moderation to the moderators. Trace/Alpha should be the ones to keep the bloggers in check. Conversely, the way you come across is as if, you are shouting at little kids to shut up.
I give you the last words.
@ Big B
It does seem that Ms. Teage is shouting at little kids to shut up. Every time I read her posts it seems she is shouting and trying to control the bloggers on this site. However, she does make some valid points. For example her concerns about the credibility of the witnessess. It seems, if sitting as fact finder, Ms. Teage would have to acquit Mr. Taylor.
What credibility of witnesses Ms. Teage is talking about: like human eating flesh, the cannibal Zigzag Marzar or the murderous beast Isaac Monger , both prosecution witnesses. These two that killed innocent civillians without any threat to their brutal war behavior. It is so sick to see what is happening in this world. The bible lesson comes handed about evil forces in high places suppressing poor poeople. It is only the wicked forces in the high places of this world that could bring such an injustce to this court calling it a trial of fact. What fact, they say, he say, she say, you say, her say, say say? Is thrid , fourth, fifth and “mystery man” say any fact?
What a waste of human resources!
Guys,
I think Ms. Teage is trying to distract us from vigorously going after the flaws of the prosecution…this is one her tricks of calming the storm, …Ah .. My name ooh…I didn’t say it…just a lil gossip..LOL…Hope mr. Taylor is doing great to day..