Siblings Give Conflicting Accounts in Ongoing Assault Case at Pademba Road Court

Siblings Sulaiman Tarawally and Susan Tarawally have given conflicting accounts before Magistrate Saio Mamakoh Betty Kallon at the Pademba Road Magistrate Court No. 3 in Freetown over an alleged altercation on May 13, 2026.

The case concerns an alleged fight that reportedly occurred at No. 9 Andrew Street, Freetown, involving the two siblings.

The accused persons are before the court in connection with allegations under Section 11 of the Public Order Act No. 46 of 1965 relating to conduct alleged to have caused public fear and disturbance of the peace.

During cross-examination by defence counsel A.R. Blah, Susan Tarawally said she could not recall exactly how long the incident lasted.

When asked whether she was present at the scene with Sulaiman on the day in question, Susan confirmed that she was.

She told the court that Sulaiman was coming down the stairs while allegedly using abusive language. She said she initially remained silent but responded after he pointed a finger at her.

Susan confirmed that she had made a statement to the police concerning the incident and agreed for the statement to be tendered in evidence. The court subsequently admitted the statement.

She further told the court that Sulaiman was not armed during the incident and that the alleged altercation took place within their compound.

Susan acknowledged that she and Sulaiman were not on good terms at the time. However, she maintained that some of the insulting remarks she made during the incident were directed at his mother and sister rather than at Sulaiman himself.

During the proceedings, the court also heard that Sulaiman, who appeared before the court as an accused person, was also recognized as a complainant and witness in relation to the matter.

A further procedural development arose when counsel A. Mansaray, who had initially been associated with the prosecution, appeared for the defence, while A.R. Blah, who had previously represented Sulaiman, appeared for the prosecution.

Mansaray subsequently raised a procedural objection, arguing that the prosecution had failed to serve the defence with the required proof of service within the stipulated timeframe.

He relied on Section 98(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2024 and argued that the alleged failure should result in the proceedings being struck out with costs.

Magistrate Kallon questioned the legal basis for the application, prompting Mansaray to argue that the court had inherent jurisdiction to dismiss the matter.

The magistrate, however, granted the prosecution an additional three days to produce the required proof of service, warning that failure to comply could result in the case being discharged.

Before adjourning the matter, Magistrate Kallon advised Sulaiman and Susan Tarawally to maintain peace and avoid confrontation, while reminding them to conduct themselves appropriately during the court proceedings.

The matter was adjourned to August 17, 2026, for further hearing and consideration of the procedural issues raised.