The transcripts of the trial of Charles Taylor, former President of Liberia. More…

  • Good morning, Mr Fornie.

  • Good morning, Mr Munyard.

  • You told us last week of your first meeting with the Prosecution, the first one of which we have a written record of in any event, in July 2003. How did that meeting come about?

  • Well, I was in Bo when two investigators from the OTP met me at the Talking Drum office and they invited me to a hotel called Mammy Yoko. Sorry, Madam Wokie. Madam Wokie in Bo.

  • Did you subsequently see them in the Mammy Yoko Hotel at a later stage, people from the OTP?

  • Well, let's stick with Mama whatever it is in Bo at the moment. How did they come?

  • Madam Wokie. Not Mammy Yoko, but Madam Wokie.

  • I haven't got her second name right. Madam Wokie.

  • Okay, that's a correction.

  • Thank you very much. How was it that they came to find you?

  • I don't know the means that they used to find me.

  • Well, did you ask them?

  • I asked them, but they did not tell me their source of information.

  • What, you said, "How did you come to get hold of me, Messrs Office of the Prosecution?", and they said, "We are not going to tell you"? Is that how they conducted their business with you?

  • They didn't tell me that. They only told me that they were doing their job. They did not tell me the exact source they used to get on to me.

  • Even though you had asked them to tell you that?

  • Had you ever heard of them before, these investigators who came to speak to you?

  • Well, I had never heard about them before the first visit. I had never heard about them.

  • You say that they met you at the Talking Drum office. How did they know you were going to be there?

  • Well I don't know how they got their information and how they were able to trace me, because at that time I was with the Talking Drum. I was working with the Talking Drums and at that time to get information about me I don't think it was anything difficult for anybody at that time to locate me.

  • Did you know - at the time at which you met these people from the Prosecution, did you know anybody else who had given an interview to the Prosecution?

  • Are you sure about that?

  • Yes, I don't recall. I don't recall that I had known anybody.

  • In any event, we know from your evidence on Friday that you knew that when they interviewed you and you gave them an account that you may well end up as a witness before the Special Court, yes?

  • Hold on a moment. I don't want to go over it all again. I am just summarising what you told us on Friday, because we saw the declaration that you affirmed on that very day which says that you know that you may be called to give evidence before the Special Court.

  • Well, what I told you exactly was that, you know, like the first question you asked me I never knew that they would call me to give evidence in court before the first visit that they visited me in Bo. Besides that, I said I had the thought. That was the thought most of us had and that was the information we used to get about the Special Court, that it was fearful and that they were going to arrest all of the ex-combatants. It was not a matter of testifying. That was the speculation that we had. I hadn't any clear information about who and who were to be indicted by the Court. So even when we would be walking around together with our colleague ex-combs in Bo, when we were there together with myself and my colleague ex-combatants, we used to say that we expected that everybody was going to be indicted. That is what I told you.

  • Mr Witness, remember to speak more slowly please for the interpreters and the people recording. Continue Mr Munyard.

  • You knew perfectly well that you were not under arrest when these two people interviewed you on 31 July 2003, didn't you?

  • This is what I am telling you, that the notion that I had about the Court was that the Court had gone there to try every combatant who took part in the war. That was my notion and that was what I shared with many other ex-combatants.

  • That's completely untrue, isn't it, that you knew or believed that the Special Court was there to try every combatant?

  • Well, I am telling you that that is the truth. That was what I felt and that was the same thing that I shared with other ex-combatants in Bo, where I lived.

  • You were chosen for radio communication training because of your level of education, weren't you?

  • Is this during the wartime, because he has said he was working for the Talking Drum.

  • I am talking about his evidence about being trained by the RUF including Foday Sankoh himself:

  • Did you follow that, Mr Fornie? May I make it clear I'm talking about the reason that when you joined the RUF you were trained in radio communications was because of your level of education which was higher than many others. That is correct, isn't it?

  • Well, all you have said is not correct. The first thing when you said when I joined the RUF that is not correct, that when I joined the RUF. To make things clear to you, I was captured by the RUF. I did not join them. And apart from that, it was not - it was not that I was more educated that many of the other people who were in the Bomi Hills training camp. That was not the reason why I was selected. I was just fortunate to fall among the group, because there were other people who were highly educated - more educated than I was in that camp, but they did not see that communication was a field that they should find themselves in because at that time the way they saw the radio men, they said the radio men did not go to the front line because the notion that everybody had about radio men was that radio men - if you are a radio man you are just --

  • Mr Witness, the question was were you selected because of your level of education. I think you have answered that question.

  • In fact, at the time that you were seized by the RUF you were 16 years old and you were on your way back to school after the school holidays. That's right, isn't it?

  • And so you were still in school at 16 at the time that you're captured and then, shortly after that, trained as a radio operator. That's all I seek to establish and that's correct, isn't it?

  • Yes, about a year. After a year. About after a year, that was when I was trained as a radio operator.

  • All right. We'll come to that. Now, you are well educated enough to understand that when the Special Court was set up it was set up to try only those who had the greatest responsibility for the war in Sierra Leone. You knew that perfectly well, didn't you, when you were spoken to by these investigators in July of 2003?

  • I did not understand exactly who the Special Court had gone to Sierra Leone for, to try. This is what I'm saying. I did not understand the category of people whom the Special Court was to try.

  • When do you say you became aware of the category of people the Special Court was set up to try?

  • Well, it was very late, around 2006, because at that time there had been more sensitisation over the various electronic media that the category of people whom the Special Court was going to try - that is the Special Court Outreach used to go on air in the various media houses in Sierra Leone. In Bo I used to listen that from various radio stations and they were sensitising people that this Court did not come to try everybody who participated in the war. It was only those who bear the greatest responsibility. That was the time - that was around 2006 that I actually got a clear picture about the Court, as to who the Court was to try.

  • So whose trial did you think you might be called to give evidence in when you signed that affirmation in July of 2003?

  • Already I had given them the interview but even when they were saying that they were not going to try - you know, I said, for me, I still thought that they would arrest any other commander in the RUF. I still had some skepticism in my mind that maybe they will still arrest or indict more RUF people.

  • You started a sentence there that you didn't finish and let me just read it to you. "Already I had given them the interview but even when they were saying they were not going to try" - and then you moved off. When you said they were not going to try you?

  • Hold on a minute. Is that who you were talking about? Was it made clear in July of 2003 that they were not going to try you?

  • Yes, they told me but I did not have proper information because our meeting at Madam Wokie was brief. Even when they told me, I was not convinced.

  • Yes, what's written down here on the transcript is, "Yes, they told me but I did not have proper information". They told you they were not going to try you, didn't they, in July of 2003?

  • That they told to me, yes.

  • Thank you. And they told you they were taking an account from you which may result in you appearing before the Court as a witness in somebody else's trial, yes?

  • They said maybe if - it was not certain that I will be a witness. They said if they interviewed me, you know, maybe, yes.

  • Mr Fornie, you and I agree on that and that is why I used the word "may" appear before the Court. In whose trial did they tell you you may appear when they took this account from you in which you did not tell them what you say was the whole truth?

  • No, what I told them was true. But the RUF trial, that is Issa and others' trial, was the main reason why they met me. They said they would like me to testify in the RUF trial.

  • They made that clear in July of 2003, yes? Just one word answer, please; yes or no?

  • That was not clear to me, even though they told me, but it was not clear to me because I was not convinced.

  • How is it if they tell you that they would like you to testify in the RUF trial of Issa and others that that is not clear to you? Either they told you that or they didn't. Which is it?

  • They told me. They told me but my - I hadn't a clear conscience that that was the correct information they were giving to me because, the way the Special Court went to Sierra Leone, they will not just spend one hour or one day to make something clear to somebody, to give somebody every information about that Court. You know, what we had gone through, I was just thinking that I should not involve myself into everything at a go and that whatever I thought that I should participate in I should have a second thought as to why I should do that. What should be the reward to the entire nation, all of those things I had to think about.

  • I will try. I will try. I will try to slow down. I will try. So I was taking my time to think about it, to say if I testified at all in this case, what would the nation really benefit from this? Because the RUF had been using us, misusing us, to distress Sierra Leone and now that this other thing had been brought I did not have much understanding about this and I said let me have a second thought about it. Let me have a proper thought about it. If I testified in this case how would the people of Sierra Leone look at me? And even my own people, how will they look at me if I testify? Because at that time even our people - even if they heard we had links with the RUF, still trying to have any connections with the RUF --

  • Mr Witness, you are again wandering away from the question. I think you have answered the question and now you are giving secondary information.

  • Thank you, your Honour:

  • You first started to say in that long reply, "If I testified in this case what would the nation really benefit from this?" Then you went on to explain what you meant by that, "How would the people of Sierra Leone look at me?" It wasn't how would the nation benefit from it, it was how would you benefit or lose from it that was in your mind, wasn't it?

  • Well, that was not what I had in mind. The primary issue in this case was that being that we the ex-combatants' characters had already been tarnished in Sierra Leone, how were we to rebuild those bad characters of ours? Like, the atrocities that we the RUF committed to the people, what was I to do? What was I to join or what was I not to join that the people would appreciate? Like, the way - like now that I am testifying here, how would some people feel or think about me? Even though I knew that I would still have some mixed feelings within the community, but I also know that some people will consider it that it is good that this man has actually come to this Court and educate us about the sort of things that the RUF were doing, the way the RUF was communicating with the Liberian President or the Liberian government. Those are the things that I think that I am talking about.

  • All right. And how was it left at the end of the interview in July of 2003? How was it left between you and the Prosecution? What was going to happen next as far as you were concerned?

  • Well, that particular day that they met me in Madam Wokie I did not grant them any formal interview. It was later when I went to Freetown, at the 44 Bathurst Street office, the Talking Drum office, that was where I gave them those pieces of information.

  • Mr Fornie, when you say you didn't grant them a formal interview in Madam Wokie's are you suggesting that they didn't write down what you said and get you to sign the bottom of every page of their notes after they read it back to you?

  • Well, that was not at Madam Wokie that I was interviewed. It was in Freetown that I was interviewed. This is what I am telling you. The interview notes that you are referring to was done in Freetown.

  • Right. Where is the Talking Drum office? I don't mean the address. I mean what city, what place?

  • Talking Drum office is at 44 Bathurst Street, Freetown. The one that is in Freetown, it's at 44 Bathurst Street. The one that is in Bo, was 5 Prince William Street, but now it has been relocated.

  • Right, so there is a Talking Drum office in Bo and a Talking Drum office in Freetown, yes?

  • Where were you seen - in which Talking Drum office - on 31 July 2003?

  • Well, the first time that they met me was in the Bo office and the second time that they met me, when I granted them the interview, was in the Freetown office.

  • So how long did you spend with them the first time and when was that?

  • I don't recall the date. The first time I don't recall the date and I did not spend up to --

  • I am not expecting you to remember a date, but was it in 2003 first of all, yes or no?

  • How long before you granted them what you call a formal interview at the Freetown office of the Talking Drum did your meeting occur in the Bo office of the Talking Drum?

  • It was roughly around two weeks, roughly something like that. I don't recall the exact duration. I don't recall the exact duration, anyway.

  • So you weren't so afraid of them after the first meeting that you went to ground and you disappeared. After the first meeting, off you go to Freetown a few weeks later and grant them a formal written interview, yes?

  • Freetown is where my office is. I had some other official matters. Being that they were still after me - you know, in fact one thing I was thinking about was that these people were after me even if I did not grant them interviews. I just thought that they will think it was because I still had something to do with the RUF and that is why I didn't want to grant them the interview. That is what gave me the cause to grant them the interview, even.

  • And they never suggested they were going to arrest you, either on the first Talking Drum meeting or the second one in Freetown, did they?

  • What is the Talking Drum?

  • Is that "Yes" a "No" practically?

  • Oh, again I am sorry. I assumed it was a "Yes" meaning a "No", in other words agreeing with me, but I will clarify that your Honour:

  • It is correct, isn't it, that they did not suggest that they were ever going to arrest you either at the first Talking Drum office in Bo, or at the second Talking Drum office some weeks later in Freetown? That is correct, isn't it?

  • Yes, they did not suggest that to me, that they would ever arrest me.

  • Tell us what the Talking Drum is?

  • Talking Drum is a formal organisation that is about - that is a conflict resolution organisation and which grants people interviews. We produce pre-taped programmes and we distribute them to the various radio stations in Sierra Leone to educate the people at that time - to educate the people about disarmament, how the disarmament process was going on and also educate people about governance. That is the role of the Talking Drums.

  • Is it a United Nations sponsored organisation?

  • Talking Drums get their funds from various partners. It depends on the time that the United Nations would want their service to work with them as partners like to produce a specific programme for them. They will make a partnership and after that programme then the partnership would end. Like any other organisation, like UNICEF, they will award them contracts for children's affairs, how to treat children, and the programme is called Golden Keys. The Talking Drum has programmes about youths. They have youth programmes and so it depends.

  • Mr Fornie, is that long answer another way of saying "Yes" to my question?

  • Well, what you said it is not that I don't know that it is the United Nations that is directly or exclusively sponsoring them, but I know that they --

  • Your Honours, can the witness repeat and speak slowly.

  • First of all, you are going too quickly for the interpreter and secondly I think you have answered the question. Mr Munyard, unless --

  • I am content to work on the basis that the United Nations does sponsor some of the programmes of the Talking Drum:

  • The programmes are to educate the people, amongst other things, about disarmament and also about the Special Court. Is that right?

  • And so central to its work about the Special Court is to explain to people who the Special Court is set up to try, isn't it?

  • Central to the work of the Talking Drum about the Special Court is to explain to people who the Special Court is set up to try?

  • Yes.

  • There is no point telling the nation what the Special Court is there for unless you explain who it is going to try, is there?

  • Well I think we needed a lot of information to educate us about the Special Court, because even myself I didn't know much about the Special Court.

  • You were one of the people whose job in the Talking Drum was to explain to the nation what the Special Court was about. How could you do that if you hadn't yourself been told what it was there for?

  • Well, that was not my field. That was not my duty. We had division of labour. We had various departments at the Talking Drums and the department where I was working was the traditional department - traditional department - like digging up history to find out about historical backgrounds of towns and villages, idioms, to ask people --

  • I am sure you can develop this in re-examination if you wish to, but the Talking Drum was amongst other things a propaganda organisation, wasn't it?

  • Right. Now they interview you once in Bo, they see you again in Freetown, they write down what you have told them in Freetown and you sign every page and you make a declaration at the end. We have seen all of that. What was said at the end of the second meeting in Freetown about when they would next be in touch with you and how they would keep in contact with you?

  • For what time that they were to get in touch with me, I don't recall the time that was given to me. At that time how they were to contact me again, it was through my office.

  • And your office where?

  • And how long did you continue to work in that office in Bo after July of 2003?

  • Well, I continued to work in the office up to - up to 2004. I think so.

  • And then where did you work?

  • From Talking Drums, while I was in the Talking Drums I had an accident with my arm and it was - I spent two years fighting to cure of my arm and after I was healed I was running part-time contracts, sometimes with Radio Moa, and I am also engaged in my private business - private agricultural business.

  • And were you at all times living in Bo?

  • No, I used to move from one place to the other.

  • Mr Munyard, was that Radio 1?

  • Right. Radio Moa, named after the river, is that correct?

  • And where was Radio Moa based?

  • Radio Moa is on Mount Kanewa [phon], Kailahun.

  • Right. And did you broadcast on Radio Moa?

  • Sometimes I did not do - yes, sometimes. Yes.

  • And where were you when you had your accident with your?

  • I was in Bo. Wait, wait. I was in Bo and I was travelling to Kailahun and I got a road accident in Kenema while headed for Kailahun.

  • And where were you treated? In what places were you treated for the damage that was done to your arm?

  • I had treatment at the Kenema government hospital and Freetown, Connaught. I had treatment in Freetown at Dr Rogers's private hospital and Kailahun, Bo and so many other areas.

  • I just want to know the places. We don't need to know whose hospital. So did you have family in Bo?

  • Yes.

  • And did your family remain in Bo while you went to various places to have treatment for your arm?

  • Sometimes they went with me and some other times they would remain in Bo.

  • Well, I don't need to know anybody's names. When I ask you about family, I am talking about parents first of all. Did your parents live in Bo?

  • Objection. I am going to object on relevance at this point.

  • He answered, Mr Santora, before you were able to make your objection.

  • Well, there is a reason for this. I am trying to establish - without giving the game away to the witness, I'm trying to establish contact.

  • That has been answered, yes.

  • It is patently relevant, in my submission:

  • Now, you had parents living in Bo. Did they know where you had gone for treatment for your damaged arm?

  • Thank you. Any other family at the time that we are talking about, 2003 onwards? Had you married by then, for example?

  • No, I was not legally married. I was not legally married.

  • Don't worry about the legalities of it, Mr Fornie. Many of us aren't legally married, but did you have a partner?

  • And while you were going to various places for treatment for your arm was your partner based back home in Bo, or was your partner coming with you to the various hospitals and so on?

  • In some of the places she was with me.

  • But did you and she have a home together in Bo that she remained in when she wasn't travelling to see you in hospital, or other medical centres?

  • Well, throughout the time that I had the accident she was with me while I was going up and down until at a point in time she transferred to Freetown for certain reasons.

  • Right. Well I don't want to know about those reasons, but is this the case, that you would have kept in touch with your parents the whole time you were having treatment, wouldn't you, in order to let them know how you were getting on?

  • Yes. And I used to keep in touch with them, both in Freetown, Bo and in my village.

  • And so by the time we get to 2006 where are you then?

  • In 2006 I was based in Bo.

  • So you were back home. When I say home, I mean in your home area.

  • And when you say Bo, were you based in the same village or part of Bo as your parents or some other part?

  • I transferred to another location. I transferred from the place where I was when I got this accident, I moved from there to another street.

  • But still in touch with your parents who were still in the same district, is that right, by 2006?

  • And so if somebody with all the resources of the Office of the Prosecutor at the Special Court had wanted to find you they could easily have tracked you down through your parents or your partner in between 31 July 2003 and 4 May 2006. That's right, isn't it?

  • Yes. I even had a phone on which they used to contact me and I turned them down.

  • You even had a phone on which they used to contact you. When did you first get that phone?

  • It was around February 2004.

  • And how did they, who you used to turn down, get the number of that telephone, in February 2004, unless you had given it to them?

  • No. I was surprised at how they got my number. I asked Alfred and others many times to tell me how they got my number but they did not tell me.

  • The investigator, Prosecution investigator.

  • What was his last name?

  • That has escaped my mind now.

  • Was it Alfred Sesay?

  • Something like that, yeah. Something like that.

  • So what contact number did you give him at the end of the second meeting with him in the Talking Drum in Freetown?

  • I gave him the Talking Drum landline number and my house address.

  • Right. Your house or your parents' house, or was your house your parents' house in 2003?

  • Well, as I can recall, I think --

  • Mr Witness, when you answer this question you do not have to give the exact address. Just generally.

  • All I want to know is when you talk about "my house address" are you talking about the address of the house that your parents and you lived in at the time?

  • I think - I don't recall the right one now from amongst the two, because sometimes I would give them both. They would ask me for my permanent and temporary address, so I don't recall now, but I am sure I gave them at least one.

  • Right. Then from February 2004 you have a mobile telephone on which to your surprise, you say, they ring you. When did they first ring you on the mobile telephone and what did they want?

  • I was in Freetown when they rang me for us to meet but I told them that no, I was not going to meet with them and that was not any of my priorities at that time. I told them that I was in pain.

  • Yes, exactly. And that's the reason you didn't meet them then, isn't it, because you had this accident and you were getting medical treatment for it and that was your number one priority. Correct?

  • Well, that was what I told them, but the priority actually was that I did the not get -

  • [Overlapping speakers]

  • No, wait. The number one priority was that I did not have any clear conscience about the Court. Even when I was in pain if I wanted to talk to them I would have spoken to them, but I just decided to ignore them because I did not have clear indication about the Court. So I was taking my time to get more understanding about the Court.

  • Were you still doing your propaganda work for the Talking Drum explaining to the nation what the Court was all about at this time?

  • No. At that time I was not going on air any more because I was - I lost my job at that time.

  • When did you lose your job? Are you talking about your job with them, the Talking Drum?

  • Around mid-2004.

  • So up to mid-2004 you had been working for the Talking Drum explaining to the nation what the role of the Special Court was, yes?

  • No. I was not the one explaining to the nation what the role of the Special Court was. I have told you this here that that was not my department. That was not my duty. Not at all.

  • Well, what was your duty with them?

  • Talking Drum has various sections. I was in the traditional area.

  • Stop, Mr Fornie. I asked you what was your role.

  • I am going to object there that this has been asked and answered.

  • I don't think it has been answered. He said what section he was in. I still haven't worked out if he was on the technical front, the writing front or the broadcasting front and those are three I can think of off the top of my head.

  • What was your role with the Talking Drum and did it change over time, over the years that you worked with them?

  • My role at the Talking Drum, I was attached to the traditional programmes, like, there is a programme --

  • Mr Witness, you have told us that but it's not clear to us. Did you write the material, did you go on the air and speak, or did you work on the machinery, for example?

  • Yes, I worked on the machines sometimes and sometimes I went to the field. Most often I went to the field to collect materials for the programme that I produced.

  • To collect materials for the programme that you produced. So you were a producer on that programme, yes?

  • Well, I was not the producer. I was a presenter. At a particular point I became a presenter, yes.

  • We have got you on your own answer collecting materials for a programme that you produced. Now we have got you as a presenter. You were doing propaganda for the Special Court in 2003 and all the way up to mid-2004, weren't you?

  • Wrong. I was not the one doing propaganda for the Special Court at that time that you've mentioned.

  • So what were you presenting after you'd been a producer on Talking Drum programmes telling the world - telling the nation what the Special Court was for?

  • Well, producer is a position. Producer at Talking Drums, it's a position. When you talk about producer, that is a position. And I was not a producer at the Talking Drums, but I used to conduct interviews and I will come back and input that into the computer and I will edit it on my own and I will voice it and I will package it and the technician would look at the levels and from there they would record and dispatch it to the various radio stations and to the various destinations.

  • So they would dispatch to various radio stations your pieces to go out on air. Is that what you're saying?

  • Yes.

  • And I'm going to try one last time. Among those pieces were you explaining the role of the Special Court?

  • No, I don't recall. I don't recall.

  • Are you saying that you did so many things that maybe amongst them was explaining the role of the Special Court?

  • I don't recall. That's what I'm telling you.

  • So you have been - would you accept that you have been involved in propagandising for this very court in your work with the Talking Drum?

  • When I was working with the Talking Drums I was not involved in any propaganda. The time I was working with Talking Drums I was not involved in propaganda.

  • Right. Let's move on from the time you lose your job with the Talking Drum. When do you next hear from the Office of the Prosecution on your mobile phone or them turning up at any of your addresses?

  • So they contact you in 2004, much to your surprise, yes?

  • Yes.

  • Just once or more than once?

  • In 2004 it was more than once.

  • I don't recall any more. I don't recall, but at least two times. I don't recall.

  • And what did they say?

  • I will tell you this repeatedly, what they told me. They told me that they would want me to be a witness for the Special Court and I turned them down. And even when I went to Freetown they insisted. And because of one reason or the other that I've explained here they tried to convince me and I gave them some pieces of information. And from that time when I was sick and I was hospitalised they still contacted me on my cell phone. They still contacted me on my cell phone. In fact, at that time I did not even respond to them. Whenever they asked me where I was I did not tell them my location because I had still not gotten proper education about the role of the Special Court.

  • Even then they still hadn't told you that you were not one of their targets. Is that what you're telling this Court?

  • I did not tell you that. I said they told me but I was not convinced. They told me that, indeed they did, but I was not convinced.

  • Right. So what bits of information did you give them?

  • The ones that are on that same paper, the first interview notes.

  • No, no, no. Mr Fornie, you know perfectly well we've moved on. You've had your accident, you have been hospitalised, they are telephoning you on your mobile phone and you said, "They tried to convince me and I gave them some pieces of information"?

  • The only time, that's the time that I'm telling you about. The time that we met in Freetown that was the time that I gave them those pieces of information, but since I got the accident I told you that they tried to meet with me but I never met with them until I decided to find out more about them - the Court.

  • And how did you find out more about them?

  • Well, the Special Court since had been going on on the radios and we had been discussing it. I had been discussing that with other people when we have conversations, sometimes we will have conversations with some other friends in some gatherings and some friends will deliberate on the Special Court, and through the media. Those were some of the ways that I got information about the Special Court, really.

  • And in 2004 was there a trial going on at the Special Court that you were aware of? Well let me try and help you, rather than have a long pause. You have mentioned somebody you named as Issa and others. What about Issa and others? Was their trial happening in the Special Court that you were still getting information about?

  • Well, that's what I'm thinking about. I don't know the exact time that the trial of Issa and others kicked off.

  • Well, I'm not asking you for a specific date. In 2004, was their trial happening at some point during that year?

  • That is what I am telling you. I don't recall the exact time that the trial of Issa and others started. For now, I don't recall it for now.

  • Did you hear at any time of a radio operator being indicted by the Special Court and put on trial?

  • That's what I'm asking. Did you ever hear at any time of a radio operator being put on trial before the Special Court?

  • Mr Munyard, do you mean any radio operator?

  • Yes, any radio operator. Thank you, your Honour.

  • You mean if the Special Court ever put any radio operator on trial? Is that what you mean?

  • That is what I mean.

  • No, I never heard that.

  • And you were never in any danger of being put on trial and you knew that throughout 2003, 2004 and any later dealings you had with them, didn't you?

  • Well, I am telling you this repeatedly. I did not understand the category of people. Even the limits, you know the category of people that the Special Court was to try, I did not know that category. I am still telling you this.

  • Let us move to 2005, please. Did they contact you in 2005?

  • Well, try a little harder. They have been on the phone to you several times in 2004. Were they still persisting the following year?

  • I don't recall all of the contact times. I cannot recall every little time that the Special Court contacted me.

  • Are you saying that they didn't contact you at all during 2005?

  • I said I don't recall. I don't recall any more.

  • 2006, please. Can you remember them contacting you in 2006?

  • How did that contact come about?

  • It was Alfred - the investigators. They were the ones who met me, Alfred and - they met me in Bo.

  • One other investigator, Mustapha.

  • Right. And how did it happen? How did the meeting get set up?

  • I do recall that initially I saw one of the investigators and he said, "Fellow, the Special Court is still in need of you and they said you had a fear". I said, "Oh, yes, I had a fear", and he said, "Why were you afraid?" I said, "Well, I had a fear because I did not know because I thought they were going to arrest all of us". He said, "Well if that is the reason I don't think you should have any fear, because you must have been monitoring how the trials have been going on. They are not going to indict many people". I said, "Okay, now I am beginning to get some clear understanding somehow". That was when he gave me - well, he said I should try and see one of the investigators, that they wanted to see me, and I said, "Okay, no problem. How would they be able to see me?", and he directed me that he would be around Daramy Rogers's office - around Daramy Rogers's office area.

  • I am going to ask you to spell that. Around what road?

  • Around Fenton Road. Around Fenton Road. Around Fenton Road. That was where I went. I went there and I contacted them and then I asked - they asked - I asked them and I said, "Oh, you were trying to see me. I understood you were trying to see me". I said, "Okay, I am in Bo and if anything you will meet me in Bo at any time", and I was seated there one day when the investigators came and met me in Bo.

  • There was an office that the witness named. Was that Daramy? Daramy Rogers?

  • That was the name I asked to be spelled.

  • Can you repeat the name, please.

  • Yes, at that time I had lost my phone. I did not have communication at that time.

  • I just want the name, please.

  • Can you spell that please, Mr Fornie?

  • To the best of my ability I spell it D-A-R-A-M-Y R-O-G-E-R-S. Daramy Rogers.

  • Right. So you meet Alfred and he explains that you needn't fear. Where was it you met him? Sorry, you say you saw one of the investigators. This is in Bo, is it?

  • Yes.

  • Was this a chance sighting of the investigator, or was this by arrangement?

  • It was not by any arrangement. It was not by an arrangement.

  • So by complete chance you happened to bump into Alfred Sesay and have a conversation with him which then leads you to a meeting with him and the other investigator, Mustapha, yes?

  • It was not Alfred Sesay. I said it was one of the investigators. I said at the initial meeting - it's the name that I have forgotten now, because for a long time now I have not been seeing him because I recall that I only met with him twice.

  • Right. You see him by chance, he knows who you are and you have this conversation which leads eventually to a meeting with them, yes?

  • Yes, he saw me. He saw me and called me and he told me that the Court still needed my service. He was the one who told me that. That led to my first meeting with Alfred and Mustapha.

  • Right. Now this investigator that you see by chance, did you know when you saw this man that he was an investigator for the Court that you happened to just come across?

  • He had met me once. I had known him and he met me once. The first time was in Bo when I saw them.

  • So the first meeting in Bo you meet with an investigator whose name you can't remember and who else?

  • He was the only one and nobody else at the time I met him for the first time in Bo.

  • Just the one the first time. I don't want to spend a long time on this because we have now moved forward, but on that first meeting in Bo - I should have asked you earlier - did he take any notes of his discussion with you?

  • I have explained about my first meeting with the investigators in Bo.

  • Mr Fornie, I didn't ask you the question when I should have done earlier. You haven't explained whether or not he took any notes. Yes or no, did he take any notes of the first meeting in Bo?

  • No, no notes. I did not give them any formal interview.

  • Let's move on to 2006. In 2006 you meet this man again by chance and he says to you, "You must have been monitoring how the trials are going". What did you say to the suggestion that you, Mr Fornie, had been monitoring how the trials were going?

  • Before he told me that, I have told you that the man told me that the Special Court was still hunting for me and that the Special Court still needed me to testify. He said the Special Court will still need me to testify.

  • Right, bear with me for a moment. He tells you that the Special Court was still hunting for you, yes?

  • Yes, yes.

  • And now would you mind answering my question. What did you say to the suggestion that you had been monitoring how the trials were going?

  • How did you monitor them?

  • Through the outreach, because when they went on the radio the outreach people used to educate people most often. So I used to listen to the radio. I used to listen to the radio and to those programmes.

  • Every day?

  • No, it was not an every day programme. I said almost every day I listened to the radio, but the programme was not an every day programme to say the Special Court was an every day programme.

  • I am not suggesting that. I just wanted to know how often you listened to the radio. And presumably, particularly when you were having treatment for your arm and weren't able to do other things as much as normally, presumably you listened to the radio a lot then? Is that right?

  • Yes, well by then radio was part of my complement. I was with my radio still.

  • Yes. In 2006, did you hear anything about the arrest of Charles Taylor on the radio?

  • Yes.

  • All right. And was the Talking Drum doing anything on the radio about Charles Taylor?

  • I do not recall what exactly happened at that time. I do not recall.

  • But the Talking Drum continues to this day to put out features on the trials before the Special Court, doesn't it?

  • At that time I did not follow up the Talking Drum programmes. I did not follow up the Talking Drum programmes, because I had been laid off by then so I did not follow up their various programmes keenly.

  • No, I'm not suggesting that you were still working for them, but the Talking Drum, which was set up in 2000, was still broadcasting material about the trials before the Special Court after you left them, wasn't it?

  • That is what I'm telling you, I said I wouldn't know that now.

  • Is that a genuine answer?

  • Well, I do not recall really. I do not recall how many times because maybe if I told you that I recalled I might not recall the kind of programmes that I listened to at that time. But generally I listened to the Outreach programmes. I got more information from the Outreach section.

  • So this man speaks to you about the trials. Did you say yes, you had been monitoring them?

  • And then you agreed to meet Alfred Sesay again, yes?

  • Yes. When Alfred and Mustapha met me.

  • Yes. And where did you meet them?

  • They met me at the house.

  • So they met you in your house in Bo, yes?

  • And they conduct another interview with you, yes?

  • And you agreed to that interview because you were now satisfied, as a result of constant contact from the Court and your monitoring of the trials, that you were no longer a possible target of the Prosecutors, yes?

  • Thank you.

  • A target for trials, to be specific.

  • Exactly, yes. So you had nothing to hide any longer by the time you were interviewed in May 2006 because you were no longer worried that you might be tried yourself, yes?

  • Not a hundred per cent, actually, but by then I had now developed up to 75 per cent confidence that I wouldn't be one of the people targeted by the Court really. Although the fear I had in me had not wiped out completely, but I was above average understanding now by then, because I had started developing some confidence actually that the Court did not come for people like us, the kind - the likes of us, so I thought of that now.

  • You knew perfectly well that the Court wasn't coming for people like you, didn't you, Mr Fornie?

  • I've told you that initially I did not know very well. And even when Alfred and others met me, I told you that part of the fear had gone, but I told you some amount of fear still remained but I said I had almost overcome some of the fear. I can say above average.

  • Right. When was the next time - and I am not asking you for a specific date. When was the next time that you were interviewed after the meeting at your house in Bo with Alfred and Mustapha?

  • I recall that it was the following day, it was the following day.

  • Right. So you were interviewed in two consecutive days, in May, at your house in Bo. After that, when was the next occasion on which you were interviewed?

  • They did not interview me in my house in Bo. We just met there and we went to a hotel. There is a hotel - there is a conference or a guesthouse in Kenema. That was where I was interviewed.

  • I see. So when you answered, "So they met you in your house in Bo, yes" - when you answered yes to that, you meant they met you there but they didn't interview you there, they took you all the way to Kenema for an interview. Is that what you're saying?

  • Yes, the following day.

  • And this place in Kenema, was that yours?

  • Was that your place in Kenema?

  • No, it was not my private place. It was not my place.

  • We've dealt with that. When was the next occasion after May 2006 that you were interviewed by them? And I am not looking for a specific date because it would be very hard to remember a specific date?

  • I do not recall any more.

  • Was it also in 2006?

  • Anyway in respect of interview dates, really I would say that I had had series of interviews, so I do not recall the specific dates on which I took all those interviews. I would not recall, but I took interviews.

  • That's why I have said I am not asking for a specific date. Can you remember if you were interviewed again in 2006?

  • Well, that is what I am telling you. I have told you that I do not recall the subsequent interviews that I had with them. I do not recall the dates. I do not recall the times.

  • Well, there were another 25 of them so it's not surprising that you don't remember the dates, but can I try and jog your memory and suggest that you were interviewed again in August of 2006. Can you remember being interviewed in August 2006 in Bo?

  • I do not recall the various months, but I do recall that I had some other interviews in Bo.

  • Yes. Interviewed in August by Alfred Sesay, Magnus Lamin, and Umaru Kamara. Do you remember meeting with them?

  • And do you remember what they wanted to interview you about?

  • Well, the specific interview, I will tell you that I recall that they interviewed me and I will say that it was not only once that Magnus and others interviewed me. But the interview that you are referring to now, I cannot tell what it entails so I cannot tell you actually what specifically they wanted to speak to me about.

  • All right. Let me try and help you. Were you interviewed at any stage about Gullit, Alex Tamba Brima?

  • And when they interviewed you about Gullit did they show you a time line in relation to him? And tell me if you don't understand anything in that question.

  • No, I do understand the question. But with regards the interviews, I do not recall that it was only once that I was interviewed or said something about Gullit and others. That is the reason why. But maybe if I saw the document I will be able to know the time. Maybe I will know that. But for now I can say that the interviews you are referring to I do not recall because there were so many other interviews.

  • Indeed. Mr Fornie, I am going to show you that interview in due course, but for my present purposes I am just trying to establish the period of time over which you were interviewed and we will come back and you can look at it. But can you remember being taken through information by the Prosecution about what Gullit was saying and you commenting on what Gullit was saying? Can you remember that happening in an interview in August of 2006?

  • I recall that during some of the interviews they asked me about Gullit. They asked me questions about Gullit.

  • I am asking you about one interview that was exclusively about Gullit. Can you remember that? Only about Gullit.

  • Well, I do recall that I was interviewed about Gullit, but it was not once and I do not recall that it was only Gullit that I was interviewed about because during various interviews --

  • We've got the point that you can only remember being interviewed about him on a number of occasions. We are going to come back to the specifics in due course. In August of 2006 you were still presumably monitoring the work of the Special Court, yes?

  • Were Issa and co still on trial then?

  • To be frank with you, I do not recall the time frame of all those trials but I know that the Court was going on at that time.

  • As far as Gullit's trial was concerned, in August of 2006 do you know what stage the AFRC trial had reached?

  • I cannot actually give you the stages or the times of the trial. I still repeat that. I cannot give you the time frame of the various stages. I do not recall them.

  • Thank you. Let me try one more time. Do you remember being interviewed about Gullit's evidence, the evidence that he was giving in his trial?

  • I recall that I took interviews about Gullit. But it was not even once. It was not even once.

  • Mr Fornie, please listen to the question. Do you remember being interviewed about the evidence that Gullit was either giving or about to give?

  • I think I have answered you that I was interviewed about Gullit, that I had interviews about Gullit.

  • Mr Witness, it's about the things that Mr Gullit said in Court that we are enquiring into now.

  • Madam President, either said or he was told he was going to say.

  • I see. Either said or you were told he might - he would say. Do you understand the question, Mr Witness?

  • No, I'm coming once more.

  • You've explained to us - well, maybe --

  • I don't want to. I want to move on:

  • Now, November 2006. Can you remember being interviewed again in November of 2006, this time by a Mr Kolot?

  • Yes, I recall that Kolot interviewed me at various times, but I do not recall the month because I had series of interviews, but I do not recall the actual months.

  • Well, we know that he interviewed you on 11 November 2006 and then again on 8 November 2006 and then again on 9 November 2006. Can you remember being interviewed - and they were lengthy interviews, taking a long period of the day. Can you remember three days running being interviewed at the end of 2006?

  • I recall that Kolot used to interview me and at a point in time I had a long interview with him. I recall, really.

  • Thank you. Now, by the end of those interviews, by 9 November 2006, were you satisfied - no longer 75 per cent but now a hundred per cent - that you weren't going to be prosecuted by the Special Court?

  • At least I had developed some confidence but it was not up to a hundred per cent, but actually I had developed some confidence. My confidence had developed somehow that I was not going to be part of or one of the indictees. Not at all.

  • Right. Well, by May of 2006 you told us you had developed 75 per cent confidence. Had that increased by November 2006 by which time you had been interviewed on seven different dates?

  • I recall that even when I still went there I raised the concern to Kolot and others because Kolot at a point in time was trying to interview me and I said, "Look, Mr Kolot, all these interviews that I have been having with you, I do not still have confidence in the Special Court" and I still continued to tell Kolot that. I asked him whether there is actually any guarantee that they would give to me that they would tell me about that people at our own level will not be indicted by this Court and that even led to - that even led to having one of the authorities write a formal letter to me to beef up my confidence that indeed it was not people at my level that they were looking out for and that I was not going to be part of the agenda of the Special Court at all having to do with trials. But even up to that time I always raised the concern.

  • Yes. So you get yourself a letter from the Prosecutor saying you're not going to face trial at all, yes?

  • And when did you get that letter?

  • I do not recall the month.

  • That is what I am saying. I recall that there was a time that it was Kolot himself who interviewed me but I do not recall the exact date or the exact time. That is what I am telling you.

  • All right. Thank you. And by this time, 9 November, you had been interviewed on seven separate occasions and you had been giving them more and more information, hadn't you?

  • Yes. More of corrections. When Kolot had the lengthy interview with me it was about more of corrections.

  • Well, some of it was corrections and some of it was a continuation of the interviews you had given earlier, wasn't it; giving them more information?

  • Well, those were all interviews. It was information that I gave. All were information. Correction itself is part of information.

  • Yes, I am not suggesting it isn't. I am suggesting you were both correcting and adding to the information you had already given them about the RUF, about various members of the AFRC and about Charles Taylor. That is correct, isn't it?

  • Then on 9 November 2006 you get a letter from Dr Staker, the acting Prosecutor of the Special Court, telling you that there will be no charges against you. Now, you don't remember the date but will you accept it from me that that was the date?

  • Yes, I have stated that here.

  • So by then you are now a hundred per cent guaranteed that you face no charges, yes?

  • Well, not 100 per cent actually, but by then I was now like relieved somehow. I did not give it - take it to be a hundred per cent confidence. He took it that it was a hundred per cent guarantee that he gave me, but I only thought that my confidence had increased.

  • So although he gave you a letter saying we are not going to prosecute you, you did not trust him? You didn't trust the head of the Prosecution of the Special Court. That's what you're saying, is it?

  • Well, he brought some relief to me somehow. He made me relaxed somehow so that I would have confidence to talk to the Court. He made me relax somehow and that made me think that maybe I will be able to sit down and talk to the Court and carry out its work and I think whatsoever the Court needed from me I thought I should now do it to the best of my ability. If I did not trust what he told me I wouldn't have come here in fact. I wouldn't have come here.

  • Quite. And so from that date on, if not earlier - from that date on you were able to speak freely about everything that you knew, yes?

  • At least I was able to talk to the best of my ability. I was able to reveal the information to the best of my ability.

  • And you were holding nothing back from that date on, yes?

  • Of course, 100 per cent fear can never be overcome, but I can say at least I felt some confidence.

  • Where are we, between 75 per cent and 100 now you have got the letter from Dr Staker? You're 75 per cent in May 2006. What percentage are you by the time you have got this cast-iron guarantee in writing from the Prosecutor?

  • Well, at least I can say it was now above 80, at least, and I think that was enough now for me to relax my mind for whatsoever thing.

  • And to be completely honest when talking to the Prosecution, yes?

  • Yes.

  • Right. Could the witness be shown the bundle, please. We've already looked at tab 1 which is the first recorded interview in July of 2003. We've looked also at tab 2, 4 and 5 May 2006. Could you be shown, please, just tab 3. Just the first page which is ERN number 22372. Mr Fornie, can you see that on the screen in front of you?

  • Yes.

  • That's an interview with you in Bo, dated 17 August 2006. Mr Court Officer, if you could pan down please.

  • Please ensure the address is not --

  • That's exactly what I'm doing. If you can pan away from the top, keep going down on the screen until you get to the body of the text. That's fine there. Thank you:

  • This is an interview of you in Bo with Alfred Sesay and Umaru Kamara, but we also know that Magnus Lamin is present. Then it says, "Source" - meaning you - "provided the following information in respect of Tamba Brima's time line". Were you shown a document setting out the dates on which certain events happened according to Gullit?

  • They read it out to me. They read it out to me. They did not give me the documents directly. They read it out to me.

  • Yes. And I'm not going to go through any more of this at the moment, and I will be corrected if I am wrong, but let me assure you the whole of this interview is about what Gullit said he did and your response to that. It's about nothing other than - essentially nothing other than what Gullit says happened. Now, at the end of it - if you would turn to the last page, please, Mr Court Officer, it's 22374. At the very end of that it says at the end of the text, "Source", which is you, "cannot provide any information on the alibi in annex A". Now, we haven't been shown annex A. Were you asked about some alibi that Gullit was putting forward or that someone else was putting forward?

  • They told me about alibi, but I told them that I did not understand alibi.

  • Right. We know that but did they tell you what the alibi was and who was putting it forward. In other words, somebody saying, "I wasn't in the place where the offence was committed". Did they tell you what alibi they were talking about?

  • I do not recall now.

  • Right. I don't want to ask you anything else about that apart - I will come back if I need to. Let's move on. Are you aware that at that stage, 17 August 2006, the AFRC trial had reached the middle of the Defence case? Were you aware of that?

  • Well, I do not know whether it had reached the middle but I know that it was going on.

  • Right. The Defence case was going on, yes?

  • I know that Gullit and others were on board but - I know that the case involving Gullit and others was going on, but to say whether it was Prosecution case or otherwise I do not recall that now.

  • Well, was it made plain to you that Gullit was suggesting as part of his defence that he wasn't in the places where the offences were committed? Was that made clear to you?

  • We're not going into - we're not retrying Gullit's case. Were you told that part of Gullit's defence was he wasn't in certain places the Prosecution said that he was in? That's what an alibi is called. Sorry, that is called an alibi. Just yes or no, were you told that?

  • Well, they asked me various questions. They asked me various questions but this alibi, I do not recall that.

  • Thank you. Turn to page 4, please. This is the first of three days' worth of interviews with Mr Kolot. We looked at this earlier. I just want to establish the sequence of events. You were interviewed by him in order that he can raise questions - talk to you about questions raised by Ms Hollis about your May interview and you are interviewed by him on that date starting at 10 to 9 in the morning and as we saw last week ending at 20 past 2 in the afternoon. Tab 5 is the notes of two days' worth of interview. The first one, as we can see from the first page of that interview, started at 10 o'clock in the morning on 8 November?

  • Please, please, I have not yet got the right tab.

  • I had not appreciated that.

  • I was just going to make the observation that as long as the page is on what is being referred to in the question, because it is just I think Mr Munyard was just getting a little ahead.

  • I am actually trying to move things faster because I am very conscious of how long it's all taking:

  • Mr Fornie, you were interviewed on 8 November from 10 o'clock in the morning, as we see from page 25040, until 12.30 in the afternoon, page 25042. The next day, we can see on the same --

  • Mr Court Officer, it's tab 5. Let's see it. Just put it on.

  • Thank you, your Honour.

  • We've moved on to page 25042 and we can see that the interview resumed the next morning at 8.30 in the morning and went on until 17 minutes past 3 in the afternoon, which we see from the last page of that interview, 25048. We can also see at the end of the text on that page that the notes were reviewed by you and Mr Kolot on 9 November.

    Just for everybody's benefit, tab 6 is in there for the sake of completeness. It's the same interview with corrections, but I think the corrections are relatively minor. If I can go to the last page of tab 6, page 25736 - I am sorry, I am going a bit fast for the Court Officer. I appreciate the difficulty he has. Thank you very much. We can see that you looked again at those notes of interview and reviewed - sorry, no, it was Mr Kolot who looked again at them on 8 December and corrected them.

    Now, tab 7 please is Thursday, 9 November 2006. I will wait for it to go on the screen. From Dr Christopher Staker, the Acting Prosecutor of the Special Court, for the attention of Mr Dauda Aruna Fornie:

    "Dear Mr Fornie, as the Acting Prosecutor for the Special Court for Sierra Leone, I would like to take this opportunity to assure you that I have not laid any criminal charges nor do I intend to lay any charges against you because of your affiliation with any parties that have been charged by this Court.

    I trust that this letter may help put your mind at ease with regards to this matter.

    Yours sincerely."

    Then he has signed it. Now that letter makes it perfectly plain that you are not going to be charged before the Special Court, doesn't it?

  • Yes.

  • You could then be 100 per cent satisfied that you had nothing to fear, yes?

  • Well, what I thought was what I told you. I said by then I had now got more than 80 per cent confidence and it was that confidence that even brought me to testify before this Court.

  • Next tab please, tab 8. Yes, this is a tab - I just want the first page shown. It's 18 January 2007 when you were interviewed by somebody called Phillip Ross - an investigator called Phillip Ross. Do you remember him?

  • Yes, yes.

  • Was there anybody else in that interview apart from you and him, or would you now be able to rememeber?

  • I do not recall any other person during that interview. We were two.

  • This record of interview consists of 92 separate bullet points. They are not paragraphed, or numbered, but there are 92 of them and you talk freely in this interview, don't you?

  • Yes.

  • Next tab, please. This is tab 9 and I'm going to - without looking at them all, I am going to take tabs 9, 10, 11 and 12 together. I will just take tab 9 to begin with. This is page 101463. Now, Mr Fornie, on 24 April last year, just six weeks before the trial of Charles Taylor was due to open at this Court - and indeed did open at this Court - you were interviewed by the Prosecution. We have no record here of who was present, who interviewed you or anything of that nature, but can you remember being interviewed on 24 April last year, just about six weeks before the Taylor trial was due to open?

  • Before that I had had some other interviews, but I do not recall the dates. Like I told you, I do not recall all the dates.

  • Tabs 10, 11 and 12 are also records of interview on that same date. I don't propose to go through them with the witness, save to make the point that these separate documents have been sent to us. They are all identical in the sense that they have no indication who was present, whether they are all on one occasion on 24 April or not:

  • But do you have any recollection now of being interviewed a little bit before the Charles Taylor trial started?

  • Yes, I recall that I was interviewed.

  • Yes. And again you had no reason to hold back any longer, did you? You weren't worried that you were going to be prosecuted and you could tell the whole truth, correct?

  • Yes, I said whatsoever that I recalled and when it was asked of me I told them.

  • The next time you are interviewed, tab 13, page 38985, you're interviewed on what appears to be 30 July through to 1 August last year - three days. Can you remember that?

  • And the people who interviewed you were Umaru Kamara and Mohamed Bangura. Do you remember both of them?

  • And who is Mr Bangura?

  • I understood that Mr Bangura was a lawyer.

  • Right. Have you seen him since you came to The Hague, but before you started giving evidence last week?

  • All right. Now, during this particular interview - and it's called a prepping - were you expecting around the time of this interview that you would soon be coming to The Hague to give evidence?

  • I did not speculate at any time that I was going to come to The Hague, or not.

  • Well, did anybody tell you that they were going through your previous interview notes with you because you would be likely to be giving evidence quite soon?

  • Well, they did not specify that. They only told me that I should be on standby and that it could happen at any time, but they actually did not tell me whether it was going to be very soon or during a later date during our discussion.

  • That is quite all right. They told you you should be on standby and that it could happen at any time. Very well. And so they went through your - the notes of your interviews that we've been looking at. Can you see on the first page, 31 July 2003, and you have made two corrections? Do you see that? Do you see that, Mr Fornie? You've made two corrections only on 31 July 2003 interview notes, yes?

  • Then they go to the next interview that we have got notes for, 4 May 2006, and you make some corrections to that. I'm not going into what the corrections are at the moment, but do you agree that you made some corrections to the notes of the May 2006 interview?

  • Yes.

  • The next page, 7 November 2006 and 8 November 2006, you've made some corrections to those interview notes?

  • Then 18 January 2007, the 92 bullet points, you've made some corrections to those, yes?

  • Yes.

  • Now what follows on page 38988, in other words what follows these three typed pages, is another copy of the notes of that first interview of July 2003. It starts on page 38988 and you're taken through it again, aren't you?

  • If we look at the right-hand side of the page, we can see just before the end of the text your initials and Mr Umaru Kamara's initial and you both dated it 30 July 2007, yes?

  • He has taken you through. If we go to the next page, 38989, this time you've signed in your case and he has initialled in his that you've been through that page, yes?

  • And on we go to the last page and do you see that we again meet this declaration that you affirmed back in July of 2003, but this time you make it again and you date it 30 July 2007? Do you see that?

  • Yes.

  • So not only in July 2003 but also in 2007, July, when you are now - you now have a rock solid guarantee that you are not going to be prosecuted and as you've told us this morning you now are telling the full truth, you again declare and affirm that you have read or had this statement read to you in the English language, or in a language you understand, that you give the statement voluntarily, that it may be used in legal proceedings before the Special Court and you may be called to give evidence before the Court, which of course you've told us you knew because you were on standby at that stage, and you understand that willfully or knowingly making false statements could result in proceedings for false testimony, that you have not willfully or knowingly made any false statements and you understand the importance of speaking only the truth and the information in the statement is true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief. That is right, isn't it? It was all gone through again, yes?

  • Yes, they went through it.

  • Thank you. Turn back, please, to page 38894. Going eight lines down from the top of the page it reads as follows, "At this time Rambo others were moving to attack Masiaka but before Masiaka was captured AFRC attacked Freetown". Why didn't you correct that and say, as you have told us repeatedly the whole of last week, that it wasn't the AFRC, but it was as you first mentioned the RUF or as you later said the RUF/AFRC?

  • Well, I did some corrections, but it's not all the corrections that I did. In fact, it's not all the mistakes in a series of documents like these that I will be able to detect. Maybe a particular document after dealing with it in maybe just one hour, which would not be even enough, we will be forced to look at another document. It will not be possible for me to detect all the mistakes at that time in respect of dates and these things that you are talking about - dates and times.

  • You are a liar, aren't you? You have never until the end of November 2007 when you are being prepped constantly - you have never before suggested that the RUF were involved in the invasion of Freetown and in July of 2007 when your mind was at ease and you were telling the full truth and you had the opportunity to amend that earlier statement you didn't take it. That's right isn't it?

  • Well, I am telling you that I am not lying in this Court. In fact to buttress what I am trying to say, even Mosquito went on the Radio BBC and declared that the RUF had attacked Freetown. Mosquito went on the radio and he said on the BBC that the RUF - the attack that was carried out in Freetown, he said RUF was part of the forces and he said in fact it was the RUF that attacked Freetown. Mosquito clearly spelt that out.

  • And that was as much a pack of lies as your evidence, wasn't it?

  • Mr Munyard, it could be that question will not be recorded or at least not broadcast because we are out of time, but it's a matter for yourself whether you start with that question again after the break.

  • I probably won't, thank you.

  • Mr Witness, it's now time for the mid-morning break and we are going to adjourn until 12 o'clock. Please adjourn court until 12.

  • [Break taken at 11.30 a.m.]

  • [Upon resuming at 12.00 p.m.]

  • Mr Santora, do I note a change of appearance?

  • Yes, Madam President. Joining the Prosecution bench is Nicholas Koumjian.

  • Thank you. Mr Munyard, please proceed.

  • Madam President, absent from the Defence bench is Mr Griffiths.

  • Right. Now, Mr Fornie, let's have a look at some of the things that you did tell the Prosecution from the year 2003 onwards. But before we do I just want to ask you about monitoring. When you first trained as a radio operator you were trained initially by the NPFL and subsequently by Foday Sankoh himself. Is that correct?

  • And the difference was that Foday Sankoh trained you in British voice procedure rather than another form of voice procedure, correct?

  • I do not understand what you mean.

  • Well, I'm quoting your evidence. You told us that when Foday Sankoh trained you, he trained you in something you called British voice procedure which was different, you said, from what you'd earlier been trained in because, and you gave an example, instead of saying "come in" such and such, in British voice procedure, you said "hello" such and such. Do you remember telling us that?

  • Well, apart from using "hello" instead of "come in" and phrases like that, was there any difference of substance between the British voice procedure and the earlier training you'd had in radio operation?

  • What were the differences of substance?

  • Like the procedure that we the RUF were dealing with, whenever you are getting ready to talk, for example if I told you - if I say "Hello, hello, hello witness for lawyer in signals, over", when the lawyer is responding the lawyer would call his call sign out saying, "Lawyer, over".

  • Your Honours, can he kindly repeat his answer.

  • Mr Witness, the interpreter hasn't caught everything you said. Please pick up your answer where you said, "The lawyer would call his call sign out saying 'Lawyer, over'." Then continue from there.

  • "Lawyer, okay, over." That's the lawyer's response. Then when I want to tell him any other thing I will call out my call sign and say "witness, witness, Waterside." That means let us go to another frequency, another secret frequency. And the lawyer would say, "Lawyer, okay. Lawyer, Roger, out." Like the NPFL voice procedure, I would only say, "Come in lawyer to witness, come in lawyer to witness", and the lawyer would say, "Yeah, witness, carry on, carry on." Then I will just tell him "Waterside". Then he will say "Roger". That was --

  • We've got that point already. What I asked you was, was there any difference of substance between the system you'd learned of how to monitor and operate a radio between the NPFL system and Mr Sankoh's British voice procedure, and I think you're saying there's no difference of substance, is that correct, it's just a difference of language? Is that right?

  • Well, it's the language that makes it different. Our own voice procedure, it's the language that makes the difference. There is a difference. Language is one of the differences.

  • We understand now that is the distinction you're drawing. Now at what stage did you move from monitoring messages to actually sending them? At what stage in your career in the RUF did you move from the monitoring to the sending or transmitting of messages, transmitting and receiving?

  • I really do not understand what your question is saying, really. I do not understand what your question is leading to, really.

  • Don't worry about where it's leading. I just want to --

  • -- get from you at what stage did you move from simply monitoring messages to actually transmitting or receiving them yourself as a radio operator?

  • To the best of my knowledge, since I started training - because when you're working on the radio that was why I had initially classified the two types of monitoring on the radio net. Like the monitoring, let me confine it to one area that you're talking about. Let me leave out the enemy monitoring. Let me --

  • Mr Witness, do you understand the question that was asked to you?

  • I understood it. That's what I'm answering.

  • You're not. You're describing something. At what point in time did you start transmitting and receiving messages as a radio operator as opposed from simply monitoring them?

  • Now I have got your clearly, because you've put it straight. I got the time - I think at that time it was in 1992 when I started transmitting on radio. 1992. That was when I started transmitting on radio.

  • All right. When did you learn decoding?

  • Decoding was part of the training that I went through at Bomi Hills.

  • Then when did you actually start to be a decoder yourself in practice?

  • I can't tell you the exact month.

  • Well, was it after - was it some time in 1998 or later than then?

  • Well, that was why I wanted to make it clear. The monitoring that you are talking about is purely monitoring enemy nets. That's where you've gone. 1998, that was when I was monitoring the ECOMOG net. That was what I wanted to establish. That was purely the ECOMOG nets that you are going to. That's a different sector in communication that we were doing.

  • All right. So when did you - let me just go back to my question - when did you actually start to be a decoder yourself in practice? What year, if you can remember?

  • For which of the communications, the RUF net or the ECOMOG net? Which one?

  • Well, when I say decoding, when did you first start to decode in practice anything?

  • To code and decode, I can say that was part of my training at the Bomi Hills. It was part of my training at the Bomi Hills.

  • I've asked you about when you were trained in it. I had then asked you when you'd actually started to do it in practice. When did you start to do it in practice, last attempt, please?

  • It was from Bomi Hills. That was where I started practicing it.

  • All right. Well, I'd like you, please, to have a look at tab 1 of the bundle. Page 1 of tab 1. And can I make it plain for those who are following this, and I'll help the witness as well in due course, but for those who have actually got the documents it's probably essential to have your finger in the handwritten version as well. I wonder if I could ask Mr Court Officer to take out of the bundle the handwritten version so that he's got it to hand too because from time to time we're going to have to alternate between the typed and the handwritten. It starts at ERN number 0003001 and if you take the whole of that, thank you. If you just keep that handy.

    We're looking at the moment at the typed version, which is the first page in the bundle, and there's some spelling mistakes in there and I'm just going to read them as they should be spelled. We know that you had this interview on 31 July 2003 and you were explaining here your personal history and you said you were captured by - and I think that should be Nimba, is that right?

  • It's Nimba. November.

  • Look at the handwritten version. It's clearly Nimba, "N" rather than "M", but we won't worry about that. You explained where you were captured and you say that's "between Torma Bum and Sumbuya in Bo District and sent to Zimmi training base". Is that right? Is that the first training base you were sent to?

  • No, it was not the first training base.

  • Where was the first training base you were sent to?

  • Yes, and where was that?

  • In Malain Chiefdom, Gandorhun Malain.

  • Which is what you told us in evidence last week. Why didn't you tell the investigators then when you were first setting out your personal history that you had originally trained in Gandorhun Malain?

  • It should be in my first interview notes. Just check my first interview notes. The information is many. The information is many and so whenever when you continue moving ahead some would be left out as you go ahead, but it's in the other interview notes. It's in my first interview note. It's supposed to be there.

  • You told them that, did you, in that first interview?

  • I'll be corrected if I say anything that's wrong, but I've been right through both the handwritten and the typed versions and there's no mention of Gandorhun Malain in your first interview, but you say you told them and they've missed it out, correct? Is that right?

  • Gandorhun Malain, in my first interview notes check that one --

  • I have checked them?

  • -- with Alfred and then check the other one with Alfred and Mustapha. It should be there.

  • No, we're dealing with the first one. It's not in there.

  • Okay, then while you are dealing with the first one it's part of my - it was part of my training. I went to Gandorhun and from there I went to Zimmi. I went to Zimmi in Gisiwulo.

  • And when you say you went to Zimmi in Gisiwulo you're using the same name Zimmi or Gisiwulo to mean that next camp, is that right?

  • The Gisiwulo training base near Zimmi. That's what I'm referring to.

  • Yes, thank you. All right. So the first base has been missed out of here. Let's carry on reading, "I was ... sent to Zimmi training base and I was trained ...", and it should say "militarily" and it should say "for two weeks". Whoever has drafted this has missed out what we can see in the handwritten version. Then the next sentence in the typed version is, "CO Paul (now dead)." If we go to page 3001, the first page of the handwritten notes, we can see six lines down:

    "I was trained militarily for two weeks. In 1993 I was taken to Kailahun by one CO Paul (now dead). I was trained as a radio wireless operator Pendembu by Foday Sankoh himself."

    Do you see that?

  • Mr Santora?

  • I'm again just going to point out that I believe that Defence counsel asked that the handwritten be put in front of the witness and it's not.

  • I am so sorry. That is absolutely right, yes.

  • That is so he can follow both. That's why I'm watching here and he doesn't have it.

  • Yes, and I will make it clear I've just read two separate sentences and I'm going to go back to the first one of those two:

  • Now, Mr Fornie, it's not particularly easy to read by yourself, but it's quite clear what's there on the page and if you go eight lines down - sorry, if you go seven lines down there's a sentence that reads, "In 1993 I was taken to Kailahun by one CO Paul (now dead)." Did you tell them that?

  • I did not tell them that it was CO Paul that took me to Kailahun. I said CO Paul was one of the men who was training us. He was among the group that captured me. I can remember.

  • Well, you've already agreed that this was read back to you and we've been through it ad nauseam that you signed a declaration when it was all read back to you that it was correct. So just try again. "In 1993 I was taken to Kailahun by one CO Paul (now dead)." Did you tell them that you were ever taken to Kailahun by CO Paul?

  • No. In fact, this document has a lot of errors. It's very difficult to correct all the errors in this document if you go through it. The writings - there are a lot of things that are different from what we have on the typed version. When they were reading it back to me, when they were reading this and this, they will read this and the other one. So the mistakes - even the typographical errors on the version are many. Even this, the way the interviewer was writing this out really was different. It has a lot of errors in it. You yourself have attested to that, that this is a document that has a lot of mistakes - this handwritten version.

  • Thank you. You agree, do you, that this document has been read back to you on a number of occasions? And when I say "this document" I'm talking about the full - the handwritten version, the one that you have initialed on more than one occasion. You agree, do you?

  • Well, not many times as you're saying it when you're saying "many times".

  • "A number of occasions", I said. I didn't say "many times". Please listen to the question.

  • If I didn't hear that one, I wouldn't have said so. The only thing was that they read it to me one or two times, not as many times as you are claiming.

  • I'm not going to pursue this, Mr Fornie, but I did not say "many times" and please don't suggest that I did. Now, can you tell me from who else could Alfred Sesay and Virginia Chitanda have got the sentence, "In 1993 I was taken to Kailahun by one CO Paul (now dead)", if it wasn't from what you were telling them?

  • Well, maybe they misunderstood what I told them.

  • So when they read it back to you on 31 July 2003, why didn't you immediately stop them and say, "That's completely wrong"?

  • I can never remember that I picked up that - those particular mistakes because the document had a lot of mistakes that they made. It had a lot of mistakes in the writing, so it was not easy to correct everything really.

  • Why didn't you correct it on 30 July 2007 when it was read back to you and you made a number of corrections in the presence of Mr Umaru Kamara and Mr Bangura, the lawyer? Why didn't you take that opportunity to correct this if it's complete rubbish?

  • Well, I am sure that in subsequent interviews after this this was something I clearly spelt out exactly. It was something I clearly spelt out exactly; how I was captured, how I moved from one place to another in terms of training and so on. This document you can see the many errors therein, typographical errors and some of the sentences are going differently, so this one is - it is not Daf that did all the mistakes from the writing. You can even see that the interviewer played some parts in the mistakes that are therein.

  • So the interviewer invented the sentence, "In 1993 I was taken to Kailahun by one CO Paul (now dead)", did they?

  • Absolutely I did not tell any interviewer that throughout in all my statements. That which is here, if you ask me I would respond that, "Yes, I did it. I said that".

  • All right. Now there's no mention in there of Mosquito being amongst your captors, is there?

  • I have not read it through.

  • No, well take it from me that there is no mention of Mosquito being amongst your captors when you give this account in 1993?

  • Well, I can remember in one of my interviews I clearly stated it. If at all it's not there, then it's the interviewer who may have left it out.

  • I'm going to stop you there. I am asking you about this interview, do you follow? We are not here talking about any other interviews yet. We'll be looking at the way Mosquito's role in your capture develops over time. Concentrate on the interview I'm asking you about and on the questions I'm asking you, please. I want to go on from here further down, and if you go back to the typed version it will probably be easier to read. Still in the first paragraph, nine lines down or eight lines down, there's a sentence that reads, "In early 1995 we went to Zogoda and Foday Sankoh again when he saw me again told me to start operating with him." Did you tell them that you went to Zogoda in early 1995?

  • Well, it was in 1993 that I went to Zogoda.

  • Are you sure about that?

  • Yes, late 1993. That was when I said we opened Zogoda.

  • Do you want to think about that again?

  • Yes, late '93 to '94. Late in December '93 that was when Zogoda operations started from Nomo Faiama. Late 1993 to 1994, that was when Zogoda opened up. Late 1993 to early 1994 and not 1995.

  • So who got the date wrong in this first interview, the interviewers or you?

  • Read the area that you're talking about.

  • "In early 1995 we went to Zogoda." Who got that date wrong?

  • Well, I did not get it wrong. It was in 1993.

  • And so you're absolutely clear you got there in 1993, yes?

  • '93 to '94. I have said that here. I said late '93 to '94, to the best of my memory. Late 1993 to 1994.

  • Right, well I still haven't had an answer to the very simple question I've now asked twice. Who got that date wrong in that first interview, you or the interviewers?

  • Well either the interviewer, or the typist, or whosoever, but not me. I did not state that, that it was in 1995.

  • Why not correct it when it's read back to you on any of the occasions when it was?

  • Now go on to the second paragraph on the typed page, please:

    "The Abidjan Peace Accord of 1996 found me at Blama Highway. While Foday Sankoh was in Abidjan Mohamed Tarawalli was in charge."

    Did you tell them all of that?

  • Yeah, it was during the Abidjan Peace Accord that I was at the Blama Highway when Foday Sankoh took off and it was Zino who was in charge.

  • Mr Fornie, I asked you not what happened but did you tell the investigators what they have recorded there?

  • So they got that right?

  • Thank you. "He was sending communications to the forces mostly about organising food raids because we had no food." Who was that?

  • It was Mohamed Tarawalli.

  • "In the raids we could capture food, drugs and diamonds."

  • Now, there's a word missing in the next sentence which I'm not going to ask anybody to turn to it because it's very obvious but it's in the handwritten. "The drugs and diamonds were immediately surrendered to the commander." Did you tell them that, that you'd capture food, drugs and diamonds and the drugs and diamonds were surrendered to the commander?

  • "The commander then made sure the diamonds especially was given to Foday Sankoh." Did you tell them that?

  • Now just tell us this: Who did you capture diamonds from?

  • From the civilians, the combatants were capturing diamonds from the civilians, people who were mining from the various front lines.

  • Were you involved in any fighting?

  • At that time I was involved in fighting through the radio because that was part of fighting. So, yes, I was involved in fighting because radio was a branch of fighting.

  • Were you involved in any combat, not as a radio operator but actually out there as a combatant?

  • Pausing here for a moment, just breaking off the time sequence, were you ever a combatant at any time?

  • If I can remember, apart from the early days - the early days in 1991, when I was captured newly as an SBU, when Mosquito and others asked me to follow them to go to Zimmi, then at one time when they said - when I was with Rebel King and others to go to the Blama Highways, really at that time I was an SBU, but really, since then, I can't remember - I can't remember any longer that I took any active part in any combat really. I can't remember.

  • Why were you an SBU, because you were 16 at the time of your capture?

  • But I was part of the Small Boy Unit. I was in the Small Boys Unit.

  • Why? You were aged 16?

  • But it was the unit that I was put. I do not - I did not put myself in the Small Boys Unit; it was the commanders who distributed us. So from since those days they sent me to the Small Boys Unit. That was where I was.

  • Back to the text, please, on the page:

    "The diamonds were given especially to Foday Sankoh. I know because that was the order and in my own station, wherever I was the radio communicator, the commander in charge told me to send communication to Foday Sankoh about the diamonds that had been captured."

    Did you tell them that?

  • Well, I showed the stages through which the diamonds passed to reach Foday Sankoh. Of course the message reached Foday Sankoh, but it went in stages.

  • Mr Witness, the question is did you tell the interviewers that?

  • Yes.

  • They've correctly recorded what you told them, in other words, yes?

  • No, something was left out. That's what I'm telling you. That I showed them stages through which the diamonds - through which the messages went before they got to Foday Sankoh.

  • Well, I'm going to carry on reading this passage about diamonds and Foday Sankoh, so wait until the end of it and then tell us if they missed anything out:

    "When I was at Blama Highway messages about diamonds were sent through me by Captain Papa to Mohamed Tarawalli aka Zino. Foday Sankoh had his own radio system from which he could monitor all communications that went on in the RUF. The expectation on Mohamed Tarawalli was that he should surrender the diamond to the leader (Foday Sankoh)."

    Can I make it clear that there should be a full stop after Foday Sankoh, if one reads the sense both of the typed and the handwritten version. That's where that particular sentence ends. So you told them that the diamonds were sent through you by Captain Papa to Mohamed Tarawalli who was expected to send them to Foday Sankoh, yes?

  • Not - they were not sending the diamonds through me. It was the message about the diamonds that were sent through me.

  • My error and I apologise, but have they recorded all that correctly? Is this what you told them?

  • That one is recorded - it's recorded correctly.

  • So have they missed anything out of what you told them or not?

  • Well, in that area I did not pick up any other thing in that sentence that was left out. I did not pick up anything, any fault therein.

  • "Finally in October 1996 we were attacked and repelled by the Kamajors, Zogoda fell and I was captured by the Kamajors." Did you tell them that?

  • "I was in captivity until" - and then I'm afraid we have to go to the handwritten version. It's page 3003, ERN number, on the handwritten version and, Mr Court Officer, could you put that page on the screen for the witness. It's the third page in, 3003. If you take the typed version out from underneath that, just so we don't lose sight of it. Thank you. At the top of that page three lines in, in the handwritten version, I'll actually read out the whole of the sentence that starts on the top line:

    "Zogoda fell and I was captured by the Kamajors. I was in captivity until" and then the words November/December have been crossed out and August/September have been put in in 1997. So it reads: "I was captured by the Kamajors. I was in captivity until August/September 1997 in Gorahun Tonkia" and then I can't quite read the district but I think the district has been - is it Kenema District? Yes, it is. Now, did you tell them that?

  • I am thinking about the months, but the rest is true. I am thinking about the months.

  • Well, two months have been written down and changed, haven't they? Mr Fornie, somebody's written down November/December first of all and then changed it to August/September. You can see that, can you?

  • It wouldn't be right for the investigators simply to decide that you'd given them the wrong information and cross out November/December and put in August/September of their own accord, would it?

  • Yes, yes.

  • I think you're agreeing with me there. And, therefore, does it follow that you must have told them to change the originally recorded dates?

  • And this presumably was done when it was first read over to you in July of 2003, yes?

  • I have now remembered the date.

  • I'm not sure if that's actually what you meant to say. Presumably this change was done when this interview notes were first read over to you in July of 2003, do you agree?

  • Well, I do not know if it's the first one or the second one, but I told them. I was still trying to approximate the time that they put there, the months. I did.

  • Well, if you go briefly - well, I'm not going to ask you to go to it, I'm just going to make the point. When we looked earlier at tab 13, where you were taken through this interview again by Mr Kamara and Mr Bangura on 30 July 2007, you initialed two corrections that you made, one on the first handwritten page and one on the second handwritten page, but you didn't initial the corrections that we're looking at now on the third handwritten page, so it must follow that they were done, those corrections, when it was first read over to you. Is that right?

  • I can't remember the right time that the said corrections were made. That is what I've told you.

  • And is that date correct, August/September 1997, that you were freed from captivity by the Kamajors?

  • It was not a date that I wrote in a document, but I can remember it wouldn't be too far from correct. It wouldn't be too far from correct really. I can't remember the exact month, but it was around that really. I can't remember the dates off the top of my head now.

  • Well, that's what I want to ask you about because we heard a lot of evidence from you about somebody called Lieutenant Jusu. Do you remember telling us about Lieutenant Jusu?

  • Yes.

  • You used to sit with him while you were in captivity with the Kamajors?

  • Well, just help us with this, please. When was it that you say that Lieutenant Jusu and you spent time together with the Kamajors? Over what period of time?

  • It was during the time that I was in Gorahun Tonkia. That was 1996 to 1997.

  • What month were you captured by the Kamajors?

  • I can't remember now. I can't remember now, but it was during the rains.

  • All right. Was it very shortly after they invaded Camp Zogoda?

  • It took some time before I was captured, because I really struggled for some time going towards various areas to make my way out. I spent some time in the bush before ever they were able to capture me.

  • But it was some time in 1996, yes?

  • It was in 1996. I have said that.

  • Now, what you told us in your evidence on Monday of last week when Mr Santora asked you, "How did you escape from the custody of the Kamajors?", you said this:

    "I went to the soldier who was there and I explained to him that now that that was the situation at hand, that is the AFRC had taken over, and I was listening to the Sierra Leone Broadcasting Service that morning, one morning, when I heard - I don't know whether it was in the - yes, one morning, because of course it was a repeated broadcast and I listened to instructions from Foday Sankoh that all RUF should join hands with the AFRC; that is we should come out of the bus and join our brothers. That is the AFRC. From there I went to Galito, that is Lieutenant Jusu, and he took me to Kenema".

    Do you remember telling us that?

  • Well I think before ever I spoke to Galito, before listening to the news I can remember I and Galito were discussing something like that. It was Galito who informed me that - who asked me if I had heard the news that RUF would likely join up with the AFRC. I can remember I stated that before ever I think I listened. But the sequence of events - the sequences, that's it, but I think I stated all of those things. I stated them here.

  • Well, you did. You did on page 21402 at line 20 onwards you said:

    "Yes, because even when I was in Gorahun Tonkia before I went when the coup took place he was the first person to let me know. He, Jusu. He said that the military had retaken over the government and that there was tendency that the RUF would join the military, they would form a team. I'm referring to the AFRC. And he himself had the willingness, that is Lieutenant Jusu, he had the willingness to take me to Kenema."

    Then Justice Sebutinde asked you, "What was the word you used? Did you say tendency?", and you said:

    "Yes, at that time it had not confirmed it to me yet that such was going on. He had not confirmed it to me yet that the RUF had joined them. It was in the morning - it was the following morning that I heard on the radio that Pa Sankoh had said - I heard that directly from Pa Sankoh when he said the RUF should join forces with the AFRC."

    You're then asked by Mr Santora, "What do you mean by the word tendency?", and you said:

    "It means maybe. It was not certain. He did not tell me the RUF had already joined forces. He said maybe the RUF would join forces. There was likelihood. He was not very sure", and he is Lieutenant Jusu.

    Now you were making it clear in your evidence, were you not, that very shortly after the AFRC coup occurred, when Foday Sankoh issued the broadcast, you heard that broadcast on the radio and you spoke to Lieutenant Jusu who told you that it was likely, but it hadn't yet happened, that the RUF would join the AFRC?

  • It was Jusu who told me. I said it was Jusu who told me that. It was Jusu who told me that the RUF would likely join the AFRC.

  • Yes, and so how long after Jusu told you that did you actually leave the captivity of the Kamajors?

  • I can't remember the duration. I can't remember the duration. I can't remember all the durations for now. I can't remember all the durations.

  • Well there was no need for you any longer to be in their captivity, was there, once the RUF was joining in the government and you had the assistance of an SLA soldier in the form of Lieutenant Jusu?

  • Well, but it still existed because the Kamajors outnumbered the soldiers in the town and I was in their care throughout. They never handed me over to the soldiers. It wouldn't have told well if I had just gone to Jusu to go and sit there by myself, so I was with them throughout until at the time - until when the time came that it was necessary to join Jusu to go to Kenema.

  • I'm trying to understand how it was you get out of captivity of the Kamajors and you haven't ever explained that. What was it that caused them to let you go free?

  • Well, it was not the Kamajors who released me per se. They did not release me.

  • But you were in their captivity, weren't you, and they wouldn't hand you over to the soldiers as you told us last week and you've just repeated that again today? Whose captivity were you in when you were released if it wasn't the Kamajors?

  • I was in the captivity of the Kamajors, but they did not say, "Go, from today you've been released". That's what I'm trying to say.

  • How did you get out from them then?

  • It was Jusu. It was Lieutenant Jusu who drove with me to Kenema. It was Jusu who took me to Kenema one morning. I and Jusu went to Kenema. In fact that night, the night that I and Jusu were to travel the following morning, it was at that night that I finally escaped from the Kamajors. I did not go back to their house. I slept in Jusu's house - in Jusu's parlour - that night and early in the morning the two of us travelled.

  • So how were you allowed to go to Jusu's house if he is a soldier and the Kamajors were not turning you over to the soldiers - the military?

  • Well, I used my personal experience to get away from them. They did not allow me. They did not tell me. I used my initiative.

  • So you escaped from them to Jusu's house and he then helped you to escape further by taking you to Kenema, is that it?

  • Yes, because I and Jusu were discussing one, two - some other issues. I and Jusu used to discuss other issues.

  • Mr Fornie, we don't want to know what you and Jusu were discussing. I simply want to try and understand first of all how you escaped from the Kamajors and, secondly, when it was in relation to the AFRC coup. How long after the coup did you escape with Jusu to Kenema?

  • I can't remember the time. I can't remember the duration anyway. I can't remember the duration.

  • So the best you can say is that what the interviewers have recorded in July of 2003 is probably correct, that it was around August/September, is that right?

  • Even at that, around August or September, it might be correct or not really, because that's why I have said that - I've not been really specific about the right month - the exact month. I cannot recall. That's why I've been changing months, because I can't remember the exact date.

  • What were you doing during the time that you were in the captivity of the Kamajors? Did they make you do any work of any sort?

  • What did they make you do?

  • They used me to plough in the farms and some used to tell me to write letters for them.

  • Right. Any other work you did for them?

  • I think so far that's what I can remember, because of course they were using me to do some domestic chores for their wives like to pound rice and some other things.

  • Right, very well. Were you paid for any of this work?

  • No, except personal contracts, but that was not only limited to the Kamajors. Even the civilians around used to take me to pound rice and some used to give me tokens, but Kamajors were not paying me for those jobs that I was doing except if somebody looks at me. Whether I worked for them or not, when I became familiar to them - when I became acquainted to them - some of them used to give me 500 leones. You know, there started to be established some interpersonal relationship between us.

  • Those are what you call personal contracts, but your work as a labourer on the farms was forced labour, wasn't it? Your ploughing on the farms you had no choice about, did you?

  • Of course I hadn't any choice.

  • No, no choice and no pay for that?

  • Were you ever in any danger while you were with the Kamajors?

  • Yes, I was in some danger really.

  • And what kind of danger was that?

  • Because when I was with them initially they did not allow me to go close to the soldiers, because if I wanted to go close to the soldiers they threatened me until later, after I had spent some time with them, that was when they started giving me some time to sit and talk with the soldiers really.

  • Why didn't they want you to speak to the soldiers initially?

  • They said they wanted me to become their own war slave. That was what they were saying. And that they had captured me, not the soldiers.

  • Were the Kamajors and the soldiers working together at that point, or separately?

  • Well, at a certain time I would be sitting and they will say they were going to a meeting together, the Kamajor commanders, but I can't really tell you the level of cordial relationship that was existing between them in terms of operations. I can't tell you the level of coordination that was between them.

  • Were you aware that one of the reasons for the AFRC coup was because the soldiers were very upset about the fact that President Kabbah seemed to be ignoring them in favour of the Kamajors; that it was a soldiers' grievance against the President because of his reliance on the Kamajors rather than them? Were you ever aware of that?

  • Yes, I heard that. I heard that.

  • And yet on your account the Kamajors let you go off and spend lots of time with Lieutenant Jusu, one of the SLA soldiers in the area, is that right?

  • Well, the camp where I was they didn't fight against one another. I can say there was some amount of relationship. There was some amount of good relationship. There was some amount of relationship between them, because I used to see sometimes they were holding meetings and they used to call one another. I used to see them going to meetings with Kamajor heads.

  • Were you threatened with death at all during your time in captivity with the Kamajors?

  • In what circumstances?

  • Many times. Many times. In fact, sometimes I would be sitting down and most of the Kamajors who came would say, "Why are you keeping this type of rebel? This is just fit to be killed". Some would bring their knives close to my neck, so I used to have those threats from them until it came to a time when I was not having that kind of pressure any more.

  • And how long into your captivity did that kind of pressure cease?

  • I had been there for more than a month, we were going to two months when I started getting some relief.

  • Did you tell the investigators in this first written interview about Lieutenant Jusu and how he helped you to escape to Kenema?

  • I can't remember now. I can't remember now, but I think I told them that it was Jusu who really helped me. I can't remember really, because this is an interview over a long time ago.

  • Mr Munyard, I wonder if I might interrupt to enquire of the witness what he means by captivity. In relation to the Kamajors, was he held in a prison, was he tied on a rope? If he could perhaps elaborate.

  • Would your Honour like me to ask the questions or would you like --

  • Mr Fornie, you've heard her Honour asking you to tell us what you mean by being in the captivity of the Kamajors. When you're first captured by them where are you held and how are you held?