Your “rape victim”, their “rape victim” and “our rape victim” has testified

It was a scene of disbelief, incredible and astonishment when the Principal Prosecution Witness (PW1) took the witness stand to narrate her story. To many litigants and watchers of the court the scene was a disappointment, a mere waste of time as they were expecting to see a lady who is over 24- year- old explaining her ordeal, but what they saw and heard was a narration of an interesting film show that they were not opportune to witness on stage, only the story that was being told to them about how the performers thrilled their invisible audience for two minutes.

Umu Bah took the stand with great expectation that she was going to open the padora’s box for viewers to see what was contained in it; she ended up disappointing her audience when she climaxed her testimony with the words “I enjoyed” and he lasted for two minutes. One could imagine her state of satisfaction and the level of zenith achieved during the two minutes period. It may be too short for others, but for her it was satisfactory and enjoyable. She did not conceal her feelings in court; though it lasted for two minutes, however she enjoyed every bit of it, meaning she was expecting it, went for it and got it at the time she needed it. So it was not an issue of duration, but an issue of social benefit and satisfaction achieved at the time she needed it was what she revealed to the court. Honest, than Fatou Jalloh the Guinean lady who claimed that she was raped by Dominic Strass- Khan, when in reality she was not at all. The similarity between the two is that one is honest, while the other was a liar, but that notwithstanding they are both liars in the same boat. They both lied about being raped, but Umu Bah took a different position, when she later realized that she made a false alarm by telling the court that she enjoyed during the two minutes exercise. She went further to justify what she meant, by explaining that she put on her jean trouser and blouse and left the room, descended the fourth floors and picked up her bag from the vehicle they both drove in to the crime scene at Kingtom.

Even when the Police wanted to assist her in building up a case of rape on her behalf, claimed that they met an off-white torn pant on the floor at the crime scene, she dismissed and frown at their assistance by telling the court that the evidence the Police was referring to does not belong to her. In fact on the day in question; she had put on the pant of her boyfriend and not the off-white pant that Police wanted to use as an exhibit against Mahmoud Tarawallie to justify a case of rape. The question, where did the Police obtain the off-white pant that they have tendered in court as exhibit? This clearly shows how some Police Officers can manipulate crime scenes to destroy innocent men and women. The witness has denied their exhibit, distancing herself from it; so what can the Police tell the public about the pant? “Beware of the Police; they are not friends of the public”

Umu Bah became a celebrity for few hours yesterday in a jam-packed court, where she proved that she is an artist not by birth but by profession. She turned the expectations of the Police and those who had sympathized with her when the news of rape against Mahmoud Tarawallie took the public platform few days back into an event that was least predicted to boomerang.

Her mannerism, behavior and the totality of her personality were explicit and depicted one single message that she was pushed into doing what she did, that is to build up a case of rape. It was  however not her ambition or objective to drive Mahmoud Tarawalie to insanity or make him unpopular in the midst of his compatriots, or be the brain/architect of losing his job as a Deputy Minister of Education, Science and Technology, but to tell him that promises made should/must be kept/honoured.

Madam Umu Bah’s reaction could be interpreted in a very simple language and must be understood by all, especially those men dating women, not the underage but fully matured and responsible women that they should learn to honour and fulfill their promises to their opposite partners. Gone are the days when lies, deceit and manipulation to get or enjoy the body parts of women succeed. These days, there is no free love or free body contacts on the basis of love, everything has to be paid for in cash and not sweet talks or empty promises. The former Deputy Minister, Mahmoud Tarawallie has learnt his love lesson well and now properly understood what life is all about. Umu may have been influenced externally by those the Minister may have stepped on their toes and were busy looking out for ways to fight back, but after a deep reflection of the past and taking into account what the two people may have done in secrecy; Umu Bah did not allow the enemies of Mahmoud to use her to achieve their goals and became the scapegoat. This could be a reason(s) for speaking the truth in court that the former Minister did not undress her as was widely rumoured and that she took her jean trouser down, pant down and after the show put them on again and left the room. The only aspect she did not elaborate on was the purported amount promised her as a gift for her pending trip to Banjul, The Gambia. No scar on her lip was detected in court and no black spot on her forehead seen again. Everything had vanished before her appearance in court yesterday. We see and hear different sides about the rape story, which a number of newspapers and radio stations have magnified over the past weeks and even the Independent Media Commission (IMC), making the entire story appeared fearful. Umu Bah has laid to rest the many speculations held by some sections of the public, telling them that they ate chickens and even communicated with her boyfriend on their way to Kingtom,but did not tell him that she was on her way with the Deputy Minister to the Kingtom abode to have a two minutes fun. This is where she lied, but not an offence committed to her boyfriend. She told him that would be returning home soon, but did not disclose where she was heading for at the time she was being driven to Kingtom. What was wrongly interpreted by rape sympathizers has been explained very explicitly by Umu Bah when she responded to questions relating to the scholarship from the defence. She admitted that the issue of scholarship had since concluded in July 2013 when it wasn’t possible for her to get one; despite the fact she was desperate to travel outside the country on a scholarship ticket from the government.  The relationship whether intimate or not between her and the Deputy Minister took precedence over what she was interested in the past. Many people had perceived the issue of scholarship as the crucial reason for the frequent visit of Umu Bah to the Minister’s office and that the Minister had used the scholarship in exchange for sex, thus generalizing and referencing it to other Government Ministers.

At the end of her testimony, several questions need to be sorted out; though she has responded to the crucial and most demanded, however; the public would want to know why did she not go to the Police Station either at Adelaide Street or CID after the incident if she was convinced that she had been raped to report the matter, instead she went home and later came to a Radio Station before going to report the matter to the New England Ville Police Station?

Also, the pictures on her phone, who took them on her behalf and why did not allow the police to obtain snap shots of her body parts that she claimed were injured? Anyway, the least said about the matter, the better as she has already told the Court that “She enjoyed”

Posted by on 7:57 pm. Filed under Breaking News, IN THE COURTROOM, NEWS, OTHER NEWS. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login