The transcripts of the trial of Charles Taylor, former President of Liberia.
Six months later?
The Prosecution will be responding to that motion as soon as it arrives, yes.
Thank you, counsel. There is one small issue that still I think should be raised with relation to this witness. During the course of this debate, and perhaps inadvertently, it was portrayed to the witness that the Prosecution were somehow representing his interests. For the record the witness should be ...
That's correct, Mr President. It has been the practice in this Court for the counsel to identify the portion of the document that is relevant to be admitted or, if need be, explain the relevance of - if the entire document is - if it is submitted that the entire document ...
The Prosecution does object to the admission of these in their entirety being admitted based on relevance. If you want me to go and explain, or if it's appropriate for --
Yes, the Prosecution also, on the understanding there is no objection, would move what is currently marked what as MFI-2 into evidence which is a copy of a news article from the Liberian newspaper The National entitled "In Sierra Leone: Whom is the government supporting, junta or democracy?" dated 14 ...
Yes. If there are no questions then the Prosecution will move what is marked currently as MFI-1 into evidence. This is a copy of a newspaper article from the Liberian newspaper, The National entitled "Who is the Judas in ECOWAS?" dated 14 October 1997 which was behind Prosecution's tab ...
There is an issue related before the witness is discharged, so perhaps we should do the MFIs first and then perhaps the witness should be here.
I have no further questions.
What about after that period?
And you counsel asked you whether or not it was lively and you asked what period and he said, "July/August '97. It was pretty lively, wasn't it?" And you said, "Correct". Do you remember saying that?
Taking you to the second reference I referred to, and just to remind you, you were asked about the media environment, the print media environment?
Okay. Now taking you back to the first reference, when you were referring to Decree 88A and you were asked if it was repealed and you said, "In theory, yes, sir", what did you mean when you said in theory?
And during the course of that questioning he was asking you, starting at line 16:
"Q. Was it repealed?
A. The government announced that it has - that it repealed
Q. So it was repealed?
A. In theory, yes, sir."
I am now taking you to another reference. You were ...
Okay. Thank you. Then I'm not going to ask you any further on. The last reference here is actually from the first day of cross-examination, 13 January 2009. This is in - I will be actually pointing the witness to two passages first before putting a question to him. The ...
Well, before you explain with respect to how journalism worked, what information did you have?
Can you explain what you mean by fact?
During the course of your response you said, and the question was - and I will put the question to you that Defence counsel asked you.
"Q. If you - do you know for a fact whether they were
trained in Libya or not?
A. My understanding of the word 'fact' in ...
And you were being asked whether or not you knew that was a fact or not?
Do you recall being asked about that?
Okay. Now, the next reference is 15 January 2009. I apologise for jumping around a bit here. The reference is page 22736 and I am particularly focusing on the witness's response at lines 22 to 23.
Mr Witness, during the course of the cross-examination Defence counsel was asking you ...
Just to clarify for the record, did you say Saa Philip-Joe?
Such as, can you give some examples?
What other parties were you referring to?
And during the course of your responses, you said, with relation to your professional writing, this is lines 5 to 6 - you said: "I did professional writing for them and other parties as well". Do you recall saying that?
Thank you. That can be taken away from the witness at this point. Mr Court Attendant, I will not be referring to the tabs any more. Now, the next reference for counsel is 14 January, 22539. The response on lines 5 to 6 is particularly the reference. Now, Mr Witness ...
And paragraph 2 says, for the record, it is recorded that you said:
"The witness stated that in many parts of his first statement taken by Dr Alan White are recorded in a confusing or erroneous manner. This included a reference to working for The Prospective. As he has stated ...
Just look at the first page. I am referring you specifically to paragraph 2. Can you look at paragraph 2?
Now, during the course of this interview, just take a look at it for a moment and then you can --
And during the course of that interview it is recorded that you said - I'm sorry, I should just give the Defence counsel the proper tab. I apologise. This is Defence counsel tab 11. If the witness can be shown tab 11, please. This is page 1 of that interview.
Okay. Now, for completeness, you later were interviewed by the Office of the Prosecution on 18 August 2008 by Peter McLaren and myself. Do you recall that?
And specifically Defence counsel asked you, line 9:
"Q. Did you have the opportunity of reading through the
record of what you had said to Randal White in November
A. In part."
What did you mean by that?
Counsel was also asking you about the opportunity to review that note when you testified in Freetown in the trial, the RUF trial, and your opportunity to review that note prior to testifying in 2004. Do you remember when Defence counsel was asking you about that?
Mr Witness, Defence counsel during the course of his cross-examination was asking you questions about an interview note that was taken by Alan White and Randy Neely in New York in November 2003. Do you remember him asking you questions about that note?
The next reference for counsel's sake is 14 January 2009, page 22610, and this is in reference to lines 9 through 11:
To answer your Honour's question, we don't know what the document is because it's not our document. It's a document that was provided to us in the course - in these tabs by Defence counsel. I have not seen this document until coming into Court and Defence ...
Thank you. That can be put away. The next document - maybe just wait one moment, I may refer to the tab one more time. Not this tab, another tab.
Can you look through that document and see anywhere where it's noted that this is a transcript?
No, just at the document in its entirety. You have already looked at it. I just want you to have it again to examine. Now, during the course of Defence counsel's questioning he referred on several occasions to the document in front of you as a transcript of evidence ...
Mr Witness, can you take a look at that document?
This is - we did not - this is not our document. I should note that this was - actually the first time the Prosecution has seen this document was in Court. This was a document that was provided to us by the Defence, so I do not know the answer to that ...
Thank you, counsel.
I apologise. I understand.
I'm sorry. I apologise. You are correct, Justice Sebutinde. This was a document that was previously shown to the witness behind Defence counsel tab 7. That is, according to the document's first page, translator's notes with relation to a proceeding - I certainly don't want to speak ...
Okay. Now I would like the witness to be shown the document behind tab 7. Now, Mr Witness, this document, specifically page 21 of this document - do you recall Defence counsel asking you questions in relation to the portion - to this document specifically with relation to this page, in terms ...
You are saying no to what?
Now I would like you to look now to the rest of that document, the questions within the rest of that document, and indicate if there are any questions related to arrests?
An open source tool for making transcripts really easy to read, search and share on the modern web
Your donations keep this site and others like it running
A Poplus component
mySociety is a registered charity in England and Wales (1076346) and a limited company (03277032). We provide commercial
services through our wholly owned subsidiary