Home   >   News   >   General News   >   201203
AG Not Ready For Tehoda   
 
  << Prev  |  Next >>
 
06-Mar-2012  
Comments ( 0 )     Email    Print
       
 
 
 
DSP Gifty Mawuenyega Tehoda
 
 
Related Stories
 
ANTHONY Rexford Wiredu, the state attorney handling the case of DSP Gifty Mawuenyega Tehoda, the police officer who has been accused of playing a key role in the cocaine turning soda case, was yesterday again in court to seek more time.

According to him, he would need two weeks to get his witnesses ready for the trial. He informed the court presided over by Mrs. Audrey Korcuvie-Tay that the DSP had not heeded an order by the High Court that she should report to the BNI every Monday to enable them to charge her formally.

However, counsel for DSP Tehoda, E.A. Vordoagu, was unhappy with Mr. Wiredu’s submission, saying the state had no case against his client.

He said the prosecution’s inability to proceed with the case could not be attributed to them because they were ready to prove their innocence in the matter.

Mrs. Korcuvie-Tay, the circuit court judge, following this, adjourned the matter to March 19, 2012.

DSP Tehoda, on February 6, was charged with abetment of crime, to wit undertaking an activity relating to narcotic drug contrary to section 56(c) and 3(2) of the PNDCL 236 Narcotics drug (Control, Enforcement and Sanction Act 1990).

The police officer who pleaded not guilty to the charge was remanded into custody by Mrs. Korcuvie-Tay on grounds that the charge was narcotic related.

The relentless effort by her lawyers to get bail for her paid off on February 14 as she was granted bail at an Accra Fast Track High Court where the judge, Justice Edward Asante, said he could not see the link between the charge and the facts against the accused.

Mr. Wiredu, presenting the facts on February 6, narrated that on September 28, 2011, Kwabla Senanu, counsel for Nana Ama Martins, a woman accused of dealing in narcotics, objected to a substance believed to be the said cocaine and prayed the court for a retesting.

The trial judge, Eric Kyei Baffour, agreed and when the substance was re-tested, it turned out to be sodium bicarbonate, baking soda.

Mr. Wiredu informed the court that the BNI began investigations into the soda cocaine following the directive by the Vice President for investigations into how the 1,020 grammes of cocaine turned into baking soda.

The investigations, according to the prosecutor, revealed that DSP Tehoda, deputy head of the Commercial Crime Unit at the CID headquarters, knew about the swapping of the substance and also knew Nana Ama.

Mr Wiredu said the police officer arranged for a lawyer for the cocaine suspect and allegedly met with Nana Ama Martins a dozen times while she was in custody and also after her subsequent release when the stuff changed to baking soda.

Explaining further, Mr. Wiredu said he would lead evidence to show that one Mr. Yankah and Serwah Gyaabah, an uncle and sister of Ama Martins respectively, told a witness in the case that with the help of DSP Tehoda, they had been able to turn the cocaine into soda after the trial judge refused to take GH¢5,000 they had wanted to bribe him with.

The witness allegedly explained that the relatives wanted to give the judge and one Lawal, the court clerk, GH¢4,000 andGH¢1,000 respectively.

This allegation, according to the prosecutor, was confirmed by one Beatrice Naab, a family member of Ama Martins who asked the witness to keep her mouth shut and not tell anyone the role played by DSP Mawuenyega and others involved.

Mr. Wiredu said DSP Tehoda told Nana Ama Martins lawyer that they had managed to swap the cocaine and that at the trial, he should ask for for a re-test. This instruction was followed by the lawyer and true to her words the cocaine turned soda.

He said the DSP jubilated in her office when she heard of the release of Nana Ama Martins.

“This enterprise of swapping of cocaine turning into soda was facilitated by accused and so she has been charged.”

In response, Mr. Vordoagu objected strongly to the prosecution’s facts, saying they were all hearsay.

Counsel, who termed the prosecution’s action as “malicious prosecution”, indicated that the prosecution was only desperate and bent on persecuting the DSP because the facts could not be substantiated in material aspect.
 
 
Source: Daily Guide Ghana
 
 

Comments ( 0 ): Post Your Comments >>

 
 
 
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Peacefmonline.com. Peacefmonline.com accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content. Please report any inappropriate content to us, and we will evaluate it as a matter of priority.
 
 
Featured Video