Solicitor for Leebda Corporation testifies in Selormey's case

Mr. Frank William Beecham, solicitor for Dr. Fredrick Owusu Boadu, President of Leebda Corporation Limited in Texas, USA, on Tuesday told the Fast Track Court in Accra that as far as he is aware, Leebda does exist.

Mr. Beecham, a partner in Bram Larbie and Company a firm of legal practitioners, said as a solicitor he keeps documents and that he has documents to show that Leebda Corporation is a registered entity.

The solicitor, who is the third defence witness, was giving evidence in the case in which Victor Selormey, a former Deputy Finance Minister, is charged with conspiring with Dr. Boadu to fraudulently cause the loss of 1.3 million dollars to the state and defrauding by false pretences.

Selormey has pleaded not guilty and is on a 1.5 billion-cedi bail with two sureties to be justified.

The court is presided over by Justice Sam G. Baddoo, an Appeal Court Judge sitting as additional High Court Judge.

Led in evidence by Defence Counsel, Mr. Barimah Manu, Mr Beecham said Dr. Boadu asked his solicitors to send several documents to the police for their investigations in the matter before the court.

He said the letter was despatched through the post with four attachments.

According to him, the first attachment was the proposal from Leebda to the Ministry of Finance, the second was the contract between the Ministry of Finance and his client, the third was the copy of the inception report by his client, while the fourth was a collection of comments from various persons to see his client demonstrate the product.

Witness tendered a document, which he said was a copy of the letter sent to the police, but the court rejected, saying it was coming from the witness (solicitor) to the Inspector General of Police and not from Leebda.

Mr Justice Baddoo pointed out that the solicitors wrote the letter and there was nothing to show that the IGP has received it.

Referring to Section 149 of the Evidence Decree, Justice Baddoo said "documents must be tendered by a representative of the business, who is responsible for keeping records and familiar with them."

He said "familiar with", refers to the representative and not the solicitor.

When counsel enquired from witness if he knew what the contract was to do and whether it was executed, the Judge said the contract or document was not in evidence and did not see it relevant for witness to talk about it.

Mr. Beecham said his client has given him a product of the contract and that he was prepared to show to the court that some work had been executed. But the prosecution objected to that arguing that "since the contract document is not here, we cannot talk about its product."

However, defence counsel replied that the issue of the product was not that of the terms of the contract. He said the contract document has nothing to do with the CD ROMS and that no contract was actually signed.

Ruling on the issue, the court said witness was not competent enough to tender the letter, since the court did not know the content of the contract.

At this stage, defence counsel declared its intentions to summon the IGP or his representative to testify, that they have received the letter.

Witness disclosed that he asked his client in USA to assist with the product in order to beef up their evidence, but surprisingly, the Bureau of National Investigations (BNI) impounded the product including a lab top and CD ROMS at the Kotoka International Airport on Monday, July 16.

Counsel therefore asked the court for an order to compel the BNI to release the lab top and CD ROMS

Answering questions under cross-examination by Mr. Osafo Sampong, Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr. Beecham said except Dr. Boadu, he did not know any of the officers of Leebda He said he did not also know their names and did not know the residential address of Dr. Boadu.

Dr. Boadu has not disclosed to him that he intends giving evidence in the case, witness added.

Hearing was adjourned to Thursday, July 19, to enable the IGP or his representative to testify in the case. Both parties will address the court on the same day.