Basiru Gassama, the Security Manager of Sun Beach Hotel, continued his testimony on 27th June, 2007 before Magistrate Buba Jawo of the Kanifing Magistrates’ Court.

Under cross-examination, he told the court that he always advised people against tarnishing the country’s image. He responded that he neither knew the accused nor ever heard her utter any seditious statement against anybody. He added that he had seen a publication in the Internet, which was titled “Banjul at the headquarters of NIA.”

He also replied that he was not called at the NIA to read the article but only made a visit there. He adduced that he could not remember the title of the article but could remember that some articles were published in 2004 and in 2005. He said he never saw the accused writing the articles. He said an ex-colleague, whose name he could not remember, gave him the article to read.

Still under cross-examination, he said he could not identify the signature of the accused, nor could he remember whether the accused person’s signature was on the article. He however said he saw the accused’s name on the first or second line of the article in question. He said after reading and understanding the whole issue, he could tell that the accused was either the author of the article or she granted the interview. He denied that there was anything in the article that suggested that Ansumana Manneh was the accused’s father. He further replied that he could neither remember the word “frosty,” nor the person who published the article. He said he could not also remember the word “glee” in the article.

He said he knew the word “typical Gambian” but did not know the word “stereo” and the word “riddle”.

He also said that he does not know the meaning of the word “peers”.

He stated some words in the article did not lend themselves to easy comprehension and had to be looked up in a dictionary. He however said that he did not look up their meaning in a dictionary.

As to whether he had ever undergone any test for psychiatric problem, he replied in the negative. He said he had read and understood Exhibit B, adding that he could not understand the meaning of a sentence read from the article by the defence counsel.

He said he understood what he read but did not know the meaning of what he called the big words in the article.

At this juncture, the case was adjourned to 3rd July 2007, for continuation.