EA Info

2024.06.05- 68th day of the Main Easter Attacks Criminal Trial against 24 Accused

2024.06.05- 68th day of the Main Easter Attacks Criminal Trial against 24 Accused
Date : 05/06/2024
Case number : HC(TAB) 2972/21
Brief update:
The subject case was taken up before the Trial at Bar for the trial (Voir dire inquiry) of the 11th accused.
23rd Accused was not present before the court because of his medical condition. However, his lawyer appeared on behalf of him therefore the trial proceeded with the previous understanding.
The voir dire inquiry re-commenced with the further cross examination of the 11th accused. The Deputy solicitor General, Sudarshan De Silva asked questions on whether the 11th accused’s lawyer had spoken to him today (5th). In reply to that, he mentioned that it was not the lawyer who represent him but another lawyer spoked to him today.
The 11th accused was asked whether he gave a statement to the Terrorist Investigation Division (TID) dated 29 May 2019. The accused stated that he did not remember the dates. Then Page number 2584 – 2585 of the file named TIR 9/2019 was shown. Accused recognized his signature in that document. Also he stated these statements were recorded by the police Sergeant 1148 Nandasiri who was the investigating officer. The accused stated that he was not given the opportunity to read and sign statements. He further stated that they threatened him to bring his mother and father if he did not sign the statements.
Then showed the page No 2616 – 2618 of the same file that was mentioned above. Accused recognized his signature.
Between September 2018 and January 2019, the accused was questioned whether he had gone to the Negombo area and to an address ( This address read out) in Kochchikade. He said he didn’t go there. Then questioned about the mobile phone No 076 6355229 he used in that time period. He said he bought that SIM card under his National Identity card. The accused was then shown a telephone subscriber information report obtained from the Dialog. Accused recognized his phone Number. However, according to that report the phone Number was under another person’s name. This document was marked as X3 and the raw contents of the relevant phone No was marked as X3(1) (Subject to proof).
A report containing telephone call data from 26th December 2018 to 9th January 2019 was shown in relation to the above phone number. This document was marked as X4 (Subject to proof). The accused was further asked whether he was aware of the possibility of knowing his whereabouts through telephone information. It was stated that the accused was aware of it. Accordingly, the information under numbers 1700 and 1701 of document X4 was shown to the accused. According to it, the phone calls were made from Kochchikade.
The accused was reminded of his father’s phone number and given a piece of paper to write down. He had written it as 076064786. The document was marked as X5. Only 9 numbers were written on that paper. The phone number was suggested to him as 0766064786 as it must have 10 digits to be a phone number. The accused admitted that it was the correct telephone number of his father.
The accused was questioned about the various places he was taken by the officers while in TID custody. Two other documents signed by the accused were shown. It was seen that those two documents were mentioned in the documents mentioned on pages 2957 and 2958 of the aforementioned file. The accused identified his signature on those documents.
A document written in the handwriting of the accused contained in pages no. 2944 to 2950 of the aforementioned file was shown to the accused. The accused identified his signature on the said document.
When the accused was detained at TID for 72 hours, he was taken to the Mobile Care shop at Kollupitiya Liberty Plaza. There was an inquiry about two telephones bought by the accused. The document related to that purchase was marked as X6. Also the signature of the accused was marked as X6(1). This was a bill dated 27th December 2018.
The accused stated that he was first remanded by the TID on 19th September 2019 and thereafter every time he was brought to the TID he was taken to a Judicial medical officer. He mentioned that when he was produced to the Judicial medical officer for the third time, he was informed that he had a chest problem, and at that time the doctor told the officer to admit him to the National Hospital, but he was not admitted to the hospital. And the accused said that he still has the document. He further stated that every time he was produced to the doctor, the officers instructed him to tell the doctor that the officers treated him well.
The accused stated that he was abducted by the army and assaulted and that he had informed this to the doctor in the first instance.
He stated that he was given a statement (confession) to be memorized at the TID. Further, the accused stated that he repeated the details that he memorized of the statement and claimed that he was in fact coached by the TID officer to make the statement. He further stated that he secretly took a sheet containing relevant information to the magistrate’s office and made the statement while looking at it. The accused also stated that he was told that he would be made a government witness if he confessed according to the instructions of the officer of the Terrorism Investigation Division.
A document including the details of subscriber of the Phone No 0766629509 was marked as X 7. Also a report on calls was marked as X8.
The cross examination of the 11th accused was concluded and the Re examination started.
It was mentioned that Mr. Sergeant Nandasiri was instructed to confess the accused.
The accused stated that the phones were purchased from the Mobile Care shop at Kollupitiya Liberty Plaza for a sale transaction of the phone equipment.
It was also stated that the accused had written the document in his own handwriting while the investigating officer was dictating it. The accused stated that the officers gave him to write two more statements and told him to write those statements looking at another document.
The document, which was said to have been given when he was referred to the judicial medical officer on the third occasion, was brought to the attention of the judges. The dates mentioned in that document did not correspond to the time of the relevant incident. Therefore, the document was not allowed to be marked as evidence.
The father of the accused (1st witness for the 11th accused) was warned to be present on 6th of June 2024.
Further trial was fixed for the 6th of June 2024.
Next date: The case will be taken up on 06th of June 2024 at 1.00pm for further trial.

Leave a Reply