Effah Darteh Nkrabea’s Paranoia in the Eye of the Tiger

Read Comments Comments (5)

• OFOSUAA 8 years ago

  EFFAH DARTEH EVEN OFFERED TO DEFEND FODEY SANKOH, THE DEMONIC SIERRA LEONEAN COUP PLOTTER WHO ENDED UP AMPTUTATING THE ARMS OF OVER TWENTY THOUSAND POOR INNOCENT SIERRA LEAONEANS DURING THEIR CIVIL WAR....AND TO THINK THAT TH ...
  read full comment

  EFFAH DARTEH EVEN OFFERED TO DEFEND FODEY SANKOH, THE DEMONIC SIERRA LEONEAN COUP PLOTTER WHO ENDED UP AMPTUTATING THE ARMS OF OVER TWENTY THOUSAND POOR INNOCENT SIERRA LEAONEANS DURING THEIR CIVIL WAR....AND TO THINK THAT THIS SHAMELESS AND CONSCIENCELESS MAN WAS EVEN ASPIRING TO BE THE NPP FLAG BEARER...HE EVEN SANG A GOSPEL TUNE ON STAGE....HE IS REAL EVIL ....VERY VERY EVIL AND CAN NEVER MESS UP WITH ANAS AREMEYAW BCOS THE GOOD LORD LOOKS AFTER HIS OWN.....DEMONIC EFFAH DARTEH, WE LEAVE U TO GOD TO DEAL WITH U.

  reply
• Godd 8 years ago

  Even people who are known to murder others are given defense lawyers. If they cannot afford one themselves, the court will appoint one for them. That is how the justice system works. Even the clearly guilty must be given the ...
  read full comment

  Even people who are known to murder others are given defense lawyers. If they cannot afford one themselves, the court will appoint one for them. That is how the justice system works. Even the clearly guilty must be given the chance the defend themselves.
  
  If Effar Dartey agrees to take on the defense of the guilty (for a fee because he is a professional lawyer), then he has to find arguments to try on that defense. He has to do this even if he knows the justices are wrong in getting bribes. It will be up to the court (or a jury in a trial) to decide whether or not to believe the argument of the defense. Often in a clear case as this one, the court (or jury) will not buy the defense's argument and will sentence the accused. But it will be unfair to try to blame the defense for putting up an argument for the accused.
  
  Your article is implying that because the justices are so obviously guilty, no lawyer should undertake to represent them. Or perhaps their counsels should just go in to plead guilty.
  
  What Effar Darteh did wrong is to come out to the public with his line of defense and asking Anas to be arrested. He should have kept his line of defense to the committee hearing or to an eventual court case. It is also to the court that he should ask for Anas to be de-hooded and provide arguments to convince the court to buy his case.
  
  He shouldn't try to bring his defense to the public. That was wrong and he would lose before the public which will argue like the present writer. After all, the public has already judged the case and condemned the justices. What is Effar Dartey appealing to the public for?

  reply
• otafirgya okoforbour kojo west. 8 years ago

  ghanafo gye gye ta do.captain my black ass.this guy was not an infantry soldier,he was at the legal secretariat.tweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeea using the words of movie star arnold scharwznegger he is A "GIRLY-MAN" ie a coward who wears ...
  read full comment

  ghanafo gye gye ta do.captain my black ass.this guy was not an infantry soldier,he was at the legal secretariat.tweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeea using the words of movie star arnold scharwznegger he is A "GIRLY-MAN" ie a coward who wears embroidery undergarments of a woman.

  reply
• Barimah 8 years ago

  I cannot hold brief for anybody. I honestly believe Anas is doing a great job and should be commended but must equally be cautioned. What we term an investigation is totally different from entrapment. In our legal jurispruden ...
  read full comment

  I cannot hold brief for anybody. I honestly believe Anas is doing a great job and should be commended but must equally be cautioned. What we term an investigation is totally different from entrapment. In our legal jurisprudence it looks as if no matter how an evidence is produced does not really matter but elsewhere it does. I believe we all have to be careful the way we choose to bring to ruins the careers of others by entrapment.
  Let us ask this question before we crucify the lawyer...is he doing his job?...is he violating any code of his legal ethics?...would you the reader be proud of your lawyer going to certain extremes to save you from a situation?...The law cannot be subjected to your skewed moral reasoning. It is simply the law and the interpretation of certain provisions differ from one lawyer to the other...you may disagree with a certain position but may we become a people who will eschew character assassination and undue insults of people who are bold enough to make a stand. Effah Darted may be as evil as the public may choose to see but it is so because he is a public figure, an astute lawyer and a smart one for that matter. Who know how evil we may be individually in our closets...self righteous hypocrites who simply cry for the blood of others whiles nursing their own evils.
  Let the judges be subjected to a fair hearing, let their lawyers be free to speak their minds...in the end, the interpretation of the law lies in the bosom of the judges and let all the faceless cowards shut their mouths and rest their pens until the determination if the case. Democracy is sweet...I guess I have the right to speak my mind.

  reply
• Kwame 8 years ago

  Judges and lawyers also wear hood...
  In Britain and her territories and former colonies judges and lawyer themselves wear hood to disguise themselves even in the court from the public. They even go to the extend of wearing h ...
  read full comment

  Judges and lawyers also wear hood...
  In Britain and her territories and former colonies judges and lawyer themselves wear hood to disguise themselves even in the court from the public. They even go to the extend of wearing hood on their dresses. That should be the point that one who wears hood should not remove the hood on the self of another.
  Effah Darthey can do himself service if he is to advocate for the hood to be removed in the courts in Ghana, but in the absence of that, and since he is in a hood himself he can not deprive another of it.
  That should have been the substance of this debate rather than the issue about he been dismissed from the army and representing criminals. If he has been successful representing criminals, then equally lawyers who should have seen to it the those criminals are keep out of the public have not been doing their job.

  reply