Essa Thomas, the last time you came with these your nonsensical statements, I ignored you. Like the deranged person you are, you thought that you could get away with these insults. I might ignore you on G_L, but do NOT for one moment think that you are getting away with something here. You will pay one day and on that day, it would NOT be a defense to say that you were under the influence. I will NOT allow myself to go past my limit on G_L today because I am wasting postings on nonentities like you. KB >From: Elow Wole <[log in to unmask]> >Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list ><[log in to unmask]> >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: Attn: List Managers --- Complaint Against Jaiteh >Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 15:24:38 -0000 > >KB, > >You sound like a paranoid schitzophrenic to me. Why give a hoot about he >says she says? You've clearly stated your position in this matter, leave >it >alone brother! This constant bickering won't ever get you anywhere. Why >do >you have to disagree first to agree? Look in the mirror and unmask >yourself >from this whatever psychotic torment/therapy you're subdued under. I hope >we're not losing a brother here. > >My best regards, > >Essa > > >>From: Dampha Kebba <[log in to unmask]> >>Reply-To: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list >><[log in to unmask]> >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: Re: Attn: List Managers --- Complaint Against Jaiteh >>Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 10:33:22 -0400 >>MIME-Version: 1.0 >>X-Originating-IP: [204.71.174.14] >>Received: from [149.68.45.24] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id >>MHotMailBCFB50C500B04004315695442D18120C4; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 07:34:54 -0700 >>Received: from maelstrom.stjohns.edu (149.68.45.24) by >>maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id >><[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 9:34:06 -0500 >>Received: from MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU by MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU >>(LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 660631 for >>[log in to unmask]; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 09:33:59 -0500 >>Received: from hotmail.com (216.33.237.35) by maelstrom.stjohns.edu (LSMTP >>for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id >><[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 9:33:49 >>-0500 >>Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; >>Thu, 21 Jun 2001 07:33:22 -0700 >>Received: from 204.71.174.14 by lw7fd.law7.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, >>21 Jun 2001 14:33:22 GMT >>From [log in to unmask] Thu, 21 Jun 2001 07:35:42 -0700 >>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Jun 2001 14:33:22.0716 (UTC) >> FILETIME=[1FB4E5C0:01C0FA5F] >>Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]> >>Sender: The Gambia and related-issues mailing list >><[log in to unmask]> >> >>Mr. Camara, thanks for your response. I hope you realize that the reason I >>did not respond to you as soon as possible yesterday was because I went >>past >>my limit as a non-managing subscriber. I tried replying but got a message >>informing me that I was past my limit for the day. Mr. Camara, I will save >>you and the List Managers the trouble of going through the archives again >>by >>laying out here what I found offensive about Dr. Jaiteh's postings. After >>that, I will also save you the trouble of contemplating 'delisting' one of >>your own. I hope by the time you finish reading this posting you (List >>Managers) and Jaiteh in particular will have NO doubts about the point I >>am >>trying to make. >> >>As soon as the Cautionary Statements were posted on G_L and people started >>discussing them, Jaiteh sent a mail to G_L querying that discussion. I am >>not a mind-reader but I can deduce from Jaiteh's subsequent conduct that >>he >>himself even realized that it was ill-advised to do what he did. After >>sending the initial query, he sent another mail to G_L saying that he made >>a >>mistake when he sent the query to G_L. He meant to send it to me >>privately. >>I took Jaiteh's explanation in good faith and sent him a 'mild' response >>explaining my position on G_L. The past month or so, I had numerous >>cordial >>(private) exchanges with Jaiteh regarding the monitoring of Kujabi's >>account. The last such exchange occurred on Monday, June 18, 2001. If >>Jaiteh >>has a 'life and death issue' (as he called it) what was stopping him from >>contacting me in private this time around to set me straight? >> >>Instead, what he did was come to G_L for the second time on June 19, 2001 >>(the day after our last private exchange on Kujabi) still questioning the >>wisdom of discussing this case in a public forum like G_L. As I said on >>numerous occasions, there is nothing wrong in Jaiteh questioning this >>tactic. Even if Lalo was not his family member, he has a right to express >>his beliefs in a public forum like this. Bamba laye expressed beliefs more >>or less similar to that of Jaiteh. I responded to Laye and I was not >>miffed >>about what he said. I am NOT miffed about Jaiteh's 'belief' either. >> >>What bothered me is the way Jaiteh was going about what he is doing. He >>throws accusations at people, i.e. discussing the case in public would >>hurt >>the accused and when you ask him how what I said would hurt the accused, >>he >>does NOT provide responsive answers. He gives a vague answer saying that >>accused persons and their lawyers get advantages over prosecutors when >>they >>'surprise' prosecutors in court. The reason I said that this answer is not >>responsive is, Jaiteh still CANNOT tell me what secrets I gave to the >>prosecutors or I would give them if I keep discussing this case in public. >>I >>have posed him this question on numerous occasions. What did I say that >>would jeopardize the lives of these people any further? He said it is a >>life >>and dead issue. >> >>As you demonstrated by saying that you looked at Jaiteh's postings but did >>not see anything that might offend me, what Jaiteh did to offend me might >>not be obvious to the naked eye. What Jaiteh did was lay the ground work >>for >>people to blame me if and when Dumo et al lose this case. Ah! KB and >>others >>were discussing the case on G_L giving prosecutors all these points and >>that >>is why the government won the case. Nothing wrong with this conclusion if >>it >>is the TRUTH. That is why I want Jaiteh to prove that I am indeed helping >>the prosecution in any way. I am sure you will agree with me that this >>problem needs to be tackled by me at this stage. Later, when everything is >>said and done and the finger-pointing begins in earnest, I might not have >>the opportunity to reach people and tell them that it is a malicious and >>false allegation to say that I did anything to jeopardize the lives of >>these >>innocent and defenseless citizens. I hope you get my point. If Jaiteh >>genuinely believes that we are hurting the defense, let him show us how. >>If >>he does not want to discuss strategy on G_L, he knows our private email >>addresses. Let him contact us in private rather than sending these stealth >>attacks and this grandstanding. The last thing I want hanging on my >>conscience is the notion that I in any way, shape or form helped to put >>Dumo >>et al in jeopardy. Anybody that makes the remotest suggestion to that >>effect >>will have some explaining to do. I will ask them to show me how my conduct >>negatively impacted Dumo et al. That is all I am asking Jaiteh to do. If >>he >>cannot do that, then he has to retract his statements. >> >>Like I said yesterday, ordinarily I would not make a big meal about such >>an >>issue. I would forcefully express my ideas and would not ask for a >>retraction or an apology. But we are dealing here with Jaiteh (the self >>appointed custodian of ethics on G_L). I wanted to show him that what is >>considered as 'offensive' is very subjective from person to person. To me, >>it is very offensive for anyone to insinuate that I am hurting Dumo et >>al's >>case and putting these citizens' lives in jeopardy. It is doubly offensive >>for the maker of those accusations to then sit back and not show me where >>I >>am actually hurting the case. >> >>Forget me for a moment. There are other people (including genuine victims >>in >>this case) that partook in the discussions we have had about this case on >>G_L. Did Jaiteh stop to think about those people before he sent his >>ill-advised mails to G_L? How would you feel if you are tirelessly trying >>to >>help your brother or your friend to get out of jail and have someone like >>Jaiteh come on G_L (for the whole world to see) and tell you that you are >>going about it the wrong way; thus laying the ground work for you to be >>blamed when things go wrong later? Worst still, Jaiteh does not back up >>what >>he is saying. I hope Jaiteh reads between the lines of what I am trying to >>say. I hope he realizes that there are other victims in this case that do >>not need further grief; people that do not need to live with the guilt >>that >>they helped incarcerate their friends and family members. Both George >>Sarr, >>Kabir and Ebrima Ceesay can attest to the fact that I do not discuss >>everything about this case on G_L. I am NOT trying to give the impression >>that I know anything bombastic about the case. What I am trying to say is >>that I think about the repercussions of my postings on the case before I >>dispatch them. In other words, Jaiteh is NOT dealing here with an >>irresponsible person that is indifferent to the plight of Dumo et al. >>Nothing in my writings suggest that I have jeopardized this case or would >>do >>so in future. So, Jaiteh's fears are unfounded. >> >>Granted, defense lawyers do benefit from an element of surprise in >>courtrooms every day. But touting this advantage at this stage of this >>case, >>tantamount to putting the cart before the horse. We do NOT have a trial >>yet. >>We are fighting to get one; a very tough fight in lawless Gambia. Now, in >>order to win that fight, the combatants fighting on behalf of the accused, >>have to be convinced of the accused innocence. How can we do that by >>allowing only the government's side to be conveyed to the people? Accused >>people pay millions of dollars to have people to put across their side >>long >>before any trial. I gave Jaiteh an example by reminding him of the OJ >>Simpson case. From day one, the defense were saying that Mark Furman was a >>racist. What the defense NEVER said in public was that the Gloves will not >>fit OJ if they are tried on him. If they did that, they would have given >>the >>prosecution an advantage and they would not have tried the gloves. >>Jaiteh's >>'element of surprise'. I am cognizant of what Jaiteh is trying to say. >>While >>the racist label on Mark Furman has an analogy in our discussions, the >>gloves does not have an analogy in our discussion. >> >>Again, I hope I made my point to you and Jaiteh in particular. Consider >>the >>matter settled on my part. >>KB >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L >>Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html >>You may also send subscription requests to >>[log in to unmask] >>if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write >>your >>full name and e-mail address. >>---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >_________________________________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L >Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html >You may also send subscription requests to >[log in to unmask] >if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your >full name and e-mail address. >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask] if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------