Why the AG dropped case against Delta 8
It has emerged that the police did not do due diligence in the case of the Delta Force 8 and that was why the Attorney General’s Department advised that the case should be dropped.
Advertisement
The Delta Force 8 were accused of aiding the escape from lawful custody of some 13 Delta Force members who were standing trial at the Kumasi Metropolitan Assembly (KMA) Circuit Court.
But in advising the police after going through the docket, Marie Louise-Simmons, a Senior State Attorney, standing in for the Chief State Attorney wrote: “I therefore advise that the charges of DISTURBANCE OF COURT AND RESISTING ARREST & RESCUE against the suspects must be dropped for lack of evidence to prosecute.”
The AG's advise, a copy of which has been seen by Graphic Online states in part: “From the docket, the incident occurred inside the KMA Circuit Court Room. The evidence suggests that it was a very busy Court that day. However only two policemen being the (CWO) [Court Warrant Officer] in the Court were made to volunteer witness statements.”
Read also: AG drops case against Delta Force 8
Following Wednesday's court sitting that ended with the discharge of the eight accused persons and the striking out of the case, there has been varied public discussions with the Minority in Parliament calling for the re-arrest of the eight.
Graphic Online has seen a copy of the State Attorney's advise on the docket and below are excepts from it.
The Evidence
“From the docket, the incident occurred inside the KMA Circuit Court Room. The evidence suggests that it was a very busy Court that day. However only two policemen being the (CWO) in the Court were made to volunteer witness statements.”
“The complainant [G/SGT Asagre Albert and G/SGT. Evans Kugbeadzor] , volunteered a statement, however his statement does not suggest that he was a witness to the incident.”
“The statement of the two Policemen clearly indicate that they could not identify any of the persons that forcibly entered the Court room that day in disregard of the judge’s orders and aided the escape. Sgt. Asagre stated clearly that he could not identify any of the said criminals."
"Sgt. Evans Kugbeadzor also stated that his attention was on the safety of the judge and after ushering the judge into her chambers; he returned and realized that all the 13 accused persons and their supporters had left the court."
"It is therefore difficult to ascertain how and on what basis these suspects were arrested. There is no indication from the diary of action that the police got any confidential information about the identity of the actual person that aided the escape."
"Again, after the arrest of the suspects, there is no indication that any identification parade was conducted for any of the possible witnesses to have identified any of the suspects."
“All the suspects have also denied in their statements that they committed any offence. Infact none of them admittted that they entered the court room that day, though some of them admitted being outside the court room that day."
“It is basic principle in criminal prosecution that there can be no better identification of an accused than the evidence of a witness who swears to have seen the accused committing the offence.”
“As it stands now, there was not even a single witness who can aid the prosecution to identify any of the suspects. There is also no other piece of evidence that links any of the suspects to the offence they have been charged with.”
“Despite the unfortunate and despicable incident that occurred the manner in which it occurred, the investigations conducted and the evidence available makes it extremely impossible to successfully prosecute any of the suspects herein," the State Attorney concluded.
Writer's email: [email protected]