Awareness Times is still trying to investigate certain aspects of the Justice Bankole Thompsonís Rape Commission Report following which we will release our full analysis of the Errors and Omissions therein. However, due to the numerous phone calls we received yesterday about our reference to Page 17 of the Report and knowing that many citizens are yet to set eyes on the Report itself to analyse it themselves, we are today publicising just one of the glaring errors that make a mockery of Justice Bankole Thompsonís credentials as a jurist of precision and international standards.
Now, persons who testified in front of Justice Bankole Thompson were ascribed references starting with CW (Commission Witness) such as CW1, CW2, CW3, CW4, etc. etc. AIG Chris Charley for example is cited as CW1 whilst Leatherboot is cited as CW16 and Foday Government Wharf is cited as CW11.
With this in mind, reading through Page 17 of the Report clearly indicates one of the disturbing reasons why that Report should be delegated to the Dustbins of History as an exercise in shabbiness. In the first paragraph of Page 17, Justice Bankole Thompson mentions a person he refers to as "CW2" and he references her as such with the following words:
"It is, however, the considered opinion of the Commission that CW2 was subjected to acts of physical mistreatment, short of rape or sexual abuse, amounting to outrages upon her personal dignity or other inhumane conduct by persons unknown."
AND THEN just after four short paragraphs on the SAME Page 17, Justice Bankole Thompson is once again referencing "CW2" not as the alleged rape victim anymore but now as a Senior Police Officer. Here is what Justice Bankole Thompson is now telling us on the same Page 17 about "CW2":
"This evidence is consistent with the testimony of CW 2 Superintendent Aiesha Bangura, who stated that none of the victims (when the event quite fresh in their memories) made any mention of Idrissa Hamid Kamara alias Leather Boot as having raped or sexually abused, or indecently assaulted her."
Unbelievable but so true! When an earlier Page 13 is referenced, it becomes even more clear the nonsense that was presented to the Nation on Page 17. So, the question is, if on one page alone, the Justice passed off such glaring nonsense where two distinct witnesses are given the same description of "CW2", one can only wonder what other nonsense happened during the compilation. For a Judge of his calibre to fail to adequately proof-read before he appended his signature is unfortunate. But Page 17 is just one example. The shabbiness in the Report is legionary. To the Dustbins please with that Report!