The prosecution's first witness, Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) Program Manager Baba Mohammed Borkai, continued his cross-examination on Monday.
According to Borkai's testimony, former Acting Justice Minister Nyanti Tuan acknowledged receiving the funds on behalf of the joint security, but said the documentation showing how the money was distributed was still being compiled at the time he spoke with LACC investigators.
However, when cross-examined by defense counsel Cllr. Arthur Johnson, who pressed him to specify exactly where this alleged statement appears in the prosecution's evidence, witness Borkai insisted that the defendant had in fact made the statement during the investigation, even though he could not point to a specific document or page.
In response, Cllr. Johnson read aloud the defendant's sworn statement made to investigators of the Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC).
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
The document contained no reference to any such promise regarding receipts, directly contradicting the witness's assertion.
When pressed on whether the defendant had submitted any additional statement not included in the evidence before the court, the witness avoided giving a direct answer, resorting instead to a lengthy and evasive response that did not confirm or deny the existence of such a statement.
Cllr. Johnson then posed a critical question:
"Mr. Witness, you have presented three conflicting accounts to this court and jury: your final investigative report, which makes no mention of any promise by defendant Tuan to provide receipts; the defendant's signed written statement, which also contains no such information; and your oral testimony before this court asserting that he made such a statement. Which of these should the jury rely upon in determining the truth?"
At this point, the prosecution objected in unison -- "Objection, Your Honor!" -- but the court overruled the objection and directed the witness to answer.
In his response, witness Borkai stated that the jury should consider all three accounts in reaching its conclusion, effectively declining to reconcile the contradictions or identify which version was accurate.
Legal analysts observing the proceedings remarked that Borkai's answer -- asking the jury to weigh three contradictory accounts without reconciling them -- may have damaged his credibility and weakened his impact as the prosecution's principal witness.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
Cross-examination is set to continue today.
