Mahama murder: Police ignored leads to arrest potential killers, free my client – Lawyer to jury

Lawyers of the Second Accused person, Asabke Alangde, who is standing trial together with Gregory Afoko, has accused the police of ignoring leads that could lead to the arrest of the potential killers of the late New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) Upper East Regional Chairman, Adams Mahama.

According to the lawyer, events leading to the acid incident on the late Adams Mahama on May 20, 2015, clearly exonerate his client, Asabke Alangde.

Gregory Afoko, a farmer, and Asabke, the Station Master of the Bolga-Kumasi-Ayamfure Lorry Station, have been accused of pouring the acid substance on the late NPP chairman leading to his death on May 20, 2015.

They have both pleaded not guilty to the charges of conspiracy and murder and the trial has ended. But the parties are addressing the seven member jury prior to judgement.

Lawyer Andrew Kudzo Vortia, Counsel for the second accused has urged the jury to unanimously enter a not guilty verdict for his client.

“Ladies and gentlemen of the Jury, today is your our day,” Lawyer Vortia acknowledged, that it is “the say the destiny of the accused persons are on your hands.”

Counsel before enticing the jury with his address, rhetorically asked “What are we here for?” then went a step further to answer by saying “somebody is dead and he died unlawfully.”

Counsel said for that unlawful death, Gregory Afoko and his client, Asabke Alangde have been charged with conspiracy to commit murder and murder.

Counsel said the Prosecution was expected to establish the role each played in the crime but from all the 16 witnesses the prosecution paraded, it was unable to prove the role of accused persons conspiring to commit the crime.

Lawyer Vortia said, “Nobody saw them (accused persons) physically” committing the act and that “it is not enough to say because A1 (Afoko) bought a drink for A2 (Asabke) so they conspired.”

*Down memory lane*

Counsel asked the jury to pay attention to the testimonies of the Investigator, Chief Inspector Augustus Nkrumah who was asked to tell which of the two accused poured acid on the accused.

Counsel said, the investigator’s response was that, “our investigations could not establish who poured the acid.”

He then asked the “Members of the jury what evidence do you need to come to a unanimous verdict?,” before saying “You don’t need evidence from anywhere.”

Taking the jury down memory lane, from the crime scene, Lovers-Inn, Afoko’s residence and the Hospital, counsel said the Prosecution called 16 witnesses and “you heard their responses from their cross-examinationsfrom counsel of A1 and A2.

*Witnesses*

Touching on the evidences of Awafo Akeresia and Baba Apayaa, the 3rd and 4th Prosecution Witnesses, counsel said, in their evidence, they said the meeting at Lovers-Inn came to a close around 10pm when A1 gave a list to A2 and same was disputed by the accused persons.

Counsel added that, they said they (accused) left earlier especially for A1 to administer a drug to his late father.

“It is not in evidence that they left the drinking spot to the commission of the crime and that moment was the only time the two were seen together,” counsel pointed out.

*Potential killers*

Counsel said they (Tofiq Murtala and Hajia Zenabu Adams (PW1 and PW8) respectively, made mentioned of two party activits who were slapped by the deceased at the Estee Hotel before he drove home prior to the incident.

Counsel sai those two could be the possible lead to the murder but the police failed to follow up.

Counsel again said, a brother of the deceased who almost crushed the deceased for crossing a gutter with a pick up could also be a potential killer and police failed to follow up.

Lawyer Vortia again told the jury that, a business partner of the deceased in Burkina Faso whom they had dispute over a contract could also be a possible lead but that was also ignored by the police.

Counsel said, Tofiq Murtala, “is the protagonist as I will described him and was the confidant and driver of the late Adams and said he was called to meet the deceased at the hospital.

Counsel pointed out that between PW1 (Tofiq) and PW8 (Hajia Zenabu Adams), they did not mentioned the names of the accused and questioned the one hour it took them to get to the hospital.

“Between this one hour what has been happening between them (Tofiq and Hajia Zenabu)? Nothing was investigated and it is possible a conspiracy theory,” counsel noted.

Counsel said apart from Asigri Quinn (PW2) and Zuwera Isaka, (PW5), the rest of the witnesses say they did not hear the deceased mentioned the names of the accused.

*Contrasting evidence*

Counsel again pointed out to contrasting testimonies of Asigri Quinn and Zuwera Isaka, both prosecution witnesses who are said to be the ones that assisted the late Adams to the hospital after the incident.

However while Asigri Quinn said he heard the deceased mentioned names of the the accused when the man was reciting quranic verses which he did not understand, Zuwera who could speak and understand Arabic language said she did not hear the deceased mentioned names.

Baffled by the situation, counsel pointed out to the jury that, if “Quinn who is a Christian admitted that he can’t speak Arabic but heard the names of A1 and A2 and while the PW5 (Zuwera),a Muslim and can speak Arabic said she did not hear,” then “this is very interesting.”

*Evasive witness*

While urging each of the jury to pay attention to the evidence of the wife of the deceased, counsel took time to point out the inconsistencies in her evidence.

“She said the husband came home around 11: pm and saw him in his car saying ‘help me help me,’ how on earth will she ask that question when she has not even open the door of the car and to know the extent of injury?” counsel wondered.

Counsel added that when asked about who the late husband said poured the acid on him, her answer was “some boys poured acid on him.”

Counsel intimated that apart from Tofiq, Quinn, Zuwera and Hajia who said they heard of the deceased mentioned names, none of them mentioned the number of officers available at the hospital when the names were mentioned.

Lawyer Vortia pointed out that, the wife of the late Adams “was invasive when being asked if the doctors heard the names of the accused persons.”

Counsel said when asked whether she saw Quinn, Zuwra and Mariama at the hospital, her response was that “she wasn’t sure if those who claimed to be on the bed side were there.”

Counsel said the witnesses was untruthful to the court and urged the jury to ignore her testimonies.

*Doctors, nurses are investigators*

Counsel said at the hospital, doctors and nurses are like investigators and whatever they hear, they would put it or placed it on the folder of their patients.

“No doctor was called to nail or absorb the accused persons and the investigators did not do their work well and the benefit goes to the accused,” counsel to the jury.

He added that “No one who is on a dying bed will speak lies and go to hell but will rather speak the truth and go to heaven,”

Lawyer Vortia urged the jury to take note of the inconsistencies of PW1, PW2, PW5 and PW8 (Tofiq, Quinn, Zuwera and Zenabu Adams) respectively.

It was counsel case to the jury that, DSP Agbenyo, (PW12), who visited the deceased on his dying bed, said “the police could not speak to the deceased” because he could not speak at the time they visited.

*Hearsay evidence, prosecution’s failure*

“Did the prosecution managed to provide enough evidence to prove the guilt of accused?” Counsel rhetorically asked.

But answering the question himself, he said “My answer is absolutely no,” adding that DSP Agbenyo (PW12) who was at the hospital said the deceased did not mentioned any names

Counsel again said, DSP Agbenyo also said “when he received the call from Tofiq, Tofiq did not mentioned names to him immediately but rather it was at the hospital that Tofiq gave him the names.

He told the jury that DSP Agbenyo (PW 12) narrations to the court was hearsay and was based on what he was told by Tofiq, Quinn, Zuwera and Mrs Hajia Zenabu Adams.

*Investigator failed miserably*

Touching on the evidence of the Investigator, Chief Inspector Augustus Nkrumah, PW16, counsel said “he failed miserably.”

According to counsel, “his handling of the gallon and cup was poor especially as an experienced investigator for 26 years “could not come out with finger print evidence to nail the accused.”

Counsel while rating his evidence to the court, counsel said the investigator failed and scored him F9.

Counsel again wondered how an investigator of such a serious matter could only “spend 3 days in Bolgatanga to investigate this case while “I (lawyer) used 4 days.”

*Investigation could not established who poured acid*

Counsel said “When PW16 (Investigator) was asked specific question during cross examination about who poured the acid on the deceased, the investigator could not tell.

Counsel said, his answer was that, “Investigations could not established who poured the acid on the deceased (referred to thw May 30, 2022, page 8- of the Investigator’s testimony under cross examination).

Counsel told the jury that, “What this means is that it was not A1 (Afoko) and A2, (Asabke)” who poured the acid on the late Adams.

Counsel said his client (A2) was promised by the deceased that he (deceased) was going to build a house for him “if they (NPP) won the elections in 2016 which they won.”

“How could he have done such a thing?” Counsel wondered.

*Why A2 left Ghana?

Counsel told the jury that, when PW1 (Tofiq) called his client on phone after the news broke in town, he (Tofiq) threatened that he (Asabke) would be killed like the way they killed his friend by the youth.

Counsel said truly to what Tofiq told his client on the phone, they (youth) also burnt down his drinking spot and kidnapped his son.

“All these happened within 12 hours,” counsel recounted before asking “Ladies and gentlemen what would you do?”

In his own answer he said, “I will flee and that’s what he (Asabke) did,” to justify why his client absconded to Ivory Coast and was later arrested on January 2019.

Counsel said from the evidence on record A1 (Afoko) and A2 (Asabke) have denied their involvement, “they have said the same thing 8yrs after in court without wavering.”

“I will go on to say that the prosecution has filed miserably to establish a case against the accused before you.

“I urge all of you to come out with a unanimous verdict to acquit and discharge the accused,” urged the jury.

EIB Network’s Legal Affairs Correspondent, Murtala Inusah, reports that, the Prosecution led by Mrs Marina Appiah Opare, a Chief State Attorney, would take her turn on April 3, 2023, to address the jury before the court presided over by Justice Afua Merley Wood, a Justice of the Court of Appeal.