Prosecutors Make Application To Call Three Additional Witnesses With Request For Issuance Of A Subpoena To Supermodel Naomi Campbell

Prosecutors in the trial of Charles Taylor have today filed a motion to call three additional witnesses before Special Court for Sierra Leone Trial Chamber judges as evidence in rebuttal against the former Liberian president, who is on trial for allegedly providing support to Sierra Leonean rebel forces during the country’s 11 year civil conflict. Prosecutors also filed an additional motion for the issuance of a subpoena to a British supermodel, who is alleged to have received a rough diamond from Mr. Taylor while he was on a trip to South Africa in 1997.

The “Prosecution Motion to Call Three Additional Witnesses,” signed by the court’s Chief Prosecutor, Ms. Brenda Hollis, relates to the incident regarding “the Accused’s [Charles Taylor] gift of rough diamonds to Ms. Naomi Campbell in September 1997 in South Africa while the accused was on a trip to various countries.”

The three witnesses who the prosecution intends to call are the supermodel who is alleged to have received the diamond from Mr. Taylor, “Ms. Naomi Campbell, Ms. Carole White, and Ms. Mia Farrow.” Prosecutors have indicated that the direct-examination of the three witnesses will be done within two hours and this therefore will not cause any undue delay of the court’s proceedings.

During the cross-examination of Mr. Taylor in January 2010, prosecutors raised the issue of Mr. Taylor allegedly giving the gift of a rough diamond to Ms. Campbell while the former president was on a visit to South Africa. Prosecutors alleged that Ms. Farrow, a close friend of Ms. Campbell, had informed them that the supermodel (Ms. Campbell) told her that after having dinner with former South African president Nelson Mandela in 1997, Mr. Taylor had sent his men to meet her in her hotel room and offer her a gift of a rough diamond – a diamond that prosecutors allege was obtained by Mr. Taylor from the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) military junta that, in partnership with Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels, ruled Sierra Leone in 1997. Mr. Taylor dismissed the allegation as “nonsense.”

The judges refused to allow the admission of evidence relating to this incident because there was no evidence to show that Ms. Farrow had made such statement under oath or by sworn affidavit, the admission of such “fresh evidence” would be prejudicial to the accused, such prejudice outweighing the probative value of the evidence.

Prosecutors now argue in their motion that “the evidence was unknown to the prosecution when it formally closed its case on 27 February 2009.” They argue that “it concerns a ‘central issue’ to the prosecution’s case: The Accused’s possession of rough diamonds.”

“When considered in the totality of the prosecution evidence, the proposed evidence supports prosecution allegations that the Accused used rough diamonds for personal enrichment and arms purchases for Sierra Leone, especially during the AFRC/RUF period in 1997. The proposed evidence also rebuts the Accused testimony that he never possessed rough diamonds,” the prosecution motion states.

If judges grant the prosecution request to call these three additional witnesses, the next question will be how do they get Ms. Campbell to come to the court and testify about the alleged incident, after she has already refused to comment on the matter to newsmen. It is in this light that prosecutors have also requested the judges to issue a subpoena to oblige Ms. Campbell to avail herself before the Special Court for Sierra Leone in The Hague.

Relying on the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, prosecutors are seeking that the subpoena be issued ordering Ms. Campbell to testify before the court and an order be given to the Registry of the court to serve and enforce the subpoena on Ms. Campbell.

“Ms. Campbell, the actual recipient of the Accused’ gift of diamonds, is clearly in a position to provide material evidence about this event,” the motion states.

“The prosecution’s repeated efforts to interview Ms. Campbell about this event have been unsuccessful and Ms. Campbell has given public statements that she does not wish to be involved in this case. Thus, judicial intervention in the form of a subpoena is necessary,” prosecutors argue.

It is not clear when the judges will rule on these applications and what exactly such rulings would be.

Inside the courtroom today, Mr. Taylor’s 12th defense witness, Mr. Joseph Menson Dehmie, concluded his direct-examination, continuing his rebuttal of the evidence of prosecution witness and former RUF radio operator Dauda Aruna Fornie, aka DAF, who in 2008 testified that he underwent training as a radio operator under Mr. Dehmie, who at that time was also a radio operator for Mr. Taylor’s National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL) rebel group. The witness reiterated his position that Mr. Fornie was never trained as a radio operator and that the young man was a mere cook for whom he (Dehmie) provided assistance.

“Counsel, I have told you that the only thing that I know about DAF was that he was in need of assistance and I gave him assistance. He was a cook and he used to fetch water for us. He was not a radio man, he never held a microphone. He was a cook,” Mr. Dehmie said as he responded to questions about Mr. Fornie undergoing training as a radio operator.

Prosecutors commenced the witness’s cross-examination as soon his direct-examination was concluded in private session. Mr. Dehmie’s cross-examination continues tomorrow.


  1. The prosecution is trying to mislead the court when they say Ms. Campbell stated she does not want to be involved in the case. In the ABC Nightline story of A;pril 22nd she told the interviewer that she ” Did not receive any diamonds from Charles Taylor ”
    I believe the defense will vigorously fight this motion. It will be interesting to see if the judges allow new prosecution witnesses after their case has been closed for over a year.

  2. This prosecution is seriously dumb and wasting precious resources that could help poor people. Charles Taylor was president of a diamond producing country. So if we even accept the crazy logic from the prosecution that Taylor gave a diamond to Ms. Campbell, does it means that such diamond was from SL?

    Did Liberia not have diamond at that time? Was it not possible for the diamond to have come from Liberia? This is the most atrocious form of seeking guilt of an accused person, especially after they have already presented all their evidences. This is a clear demonstration that the prosecution realizes they did a poor job in presenting their case. That they would still be witch hunting to bring in new witnesses.

    1. Momo,
      How about this?? It could be, the diamond was mined with the word SIERRALEONE written on
      My brother, the whole case is a big schem…FOUR-ONE-NINE.. GOBACHOP MARKET…..ha..ha

  3. What sort of prosecution is this? This is one of the most incompetent bunch of prosecutors I have ever seen. Why seek to compel someone to testify when you don’t even know what their position is? Why did the prosecution choose to tender a declaration earlier if they knew applying for a supoaena was a better option? Why is this prosecution going back and forth? Me thinks this trial has become a total mockery of the justice system. No thanks to Ms Brendah Hollis!

  4. An Open Letter to the Defense Team.

    Dear Mr. Griffiths, Anyah, Monyard et al.

    In my submission, I recommend that a motion for dismissal be filed with the court on the ground of record tempering by an agent (s) of the prosecution. Judge Sebutinde has vehemently stated on the record that the act is illegal. The motion could be upheld or deny, but for the record, it could be used as one of the reasons for an appeal down the road. Yes?

    The prosecution is leaving no stone unturned. The recent move by the prosecution to subpoena Ms. Campbell goes to show the prosecution is doing everything/anything out of the ordinary to get a guilty verdict. I believe the defense should be doing the same to exonerate President Taylor.

    Thanks, and continue the excellent work.

    1. Hi Tracey,

      Do you remember I posted some questions to you about the subpoena of Ms Campbell? You were supposed to research the questions and post the answers. Well, you don’t have to research the questions any more; the prosecution must have been reading my blog.

      If the prosecution is granted the subpoena, they will be playing with fire, and they will get burned. I can see Ms Campbell taking the witness stand testifying that President Taylor did not give her any diamond. Ms Campbell is no fool, I am positive she will stick to her previous statements that President Taylor didn’t give her any diamond. So, if she has to testify against her will, it will not make a difference. I am hoping that the court will grant the subpoena.

      In most cases, subpoena works when there is a deal to be made for a lesser jail time. Unfortunately, it is not the case with Ms. Campbell.

      1. Big B.
        I can see miss Cambell screaming at Brenda Holis in the court room. You and I know how nice she is ha This case is turning to a mere joke everyday. It seems as though Brenda Holis is thinking that forcing Cambell to come to court would make her change her previous account. I don’t know how to describe the integrity of this case anymore. This is one of the most unfair deals to ever exist in history of man kind. Are these prosecutions actually serious about all these dramas???? GOD WILL TAKE CARE OF THEM LATER….

  5. Has anyone said what was the reason Mr. Taylor gave Ms. Campbell a huge according to Ms. Farrow or half dozen diamonds as Ms. White said. Why would Ms. White open the door to men who was throwing rock at her window? This could be very interesting.

  6. Tracey,
    If Ms. Campbell said men gave her a huge diamond according to Ms. Farrow or half dozen diamonds as Ms. White said, how does this connect Mr. Taylor to buying weapons for the RUF? Just how does this make the prosecution allegation true?

    1. Ken,
      Tracey is way and so cannot respond to comments right now but to give a brief view on your question, yes, proving that Mr. Taylor gave the diamond(s) to Ms. Campbell does not necessarily translate to proof that the diamonds were for the RUF/AFRC. But it might certainly have some implications on the case, which prosecutors could use to their advantage.
      1. Mr. Taylor is his testimony has said that he was never in physical possession of diamonds, especially so when he made the 1997 trip to South Africa. Proof that he gave the diamond to Ms. Campbell will rebut his evidence that he did not possess diamonds in 1997. This will discredit Mr. Taylor as a witness and prosecutors will argue that because of such blatant “lie”, Mr. Taylor’s entire account cannot be relied on anymore.
      2. Previous witnesses have testified that RUF/AFRC rebels gave Mr. Taylor diamonds in 1997 before he left for South Africa. These diamonds, the witnesses said, were given to him to purchase arms and ammunition for the rebels in Sierra Leone. According to the witnesses, about the time that Mr. Taylor made this trip or returned from the trip, a huge consignment of arms and ammunition arrived at an airstrip in Magburaka, northern Sierra Leone. They claimed that this arms shipment was facilitated by Mr. Taylor. Now if indeed it is proved that Mr. Taylor did give Ms. Campbell the diamond(s), which Mr. Taylor has denied, then prosecutors can link Mr. Taylor’s possession of diamonds in 1997 to the evidence that the rebels did indeed give him diamonds in 1997 for the purchase of arms and ammunition.

      As it is now, it is a wait and see game. Let us see first how the judges rule on the application. If the prosecution’s wish is granted, then we’ll wait and see how they lead the evidence and how the defense cross-examines the witnesses.

      I hope this explanation is helpful.

      1. Alpha,
        Is this some kind of JOKE you telling us?? Really, because X person said Ior we gave him diamond before going to South Africa to go buy arms meant if he gave Ms. Campbell a diamond it was THAT DIAMOND?? Are you for real Alpha?? So based on your theory, Ms. Campbell was the MIDDLE PERSON between Mr. Taylor and this arm company right?? Will Pres. Mandela be inviting Mr. Taylor to come to his birthday bash to buy arms is that what you’re telling us Alpha??

        So let ask you, what if Ms. Campbell testifies that she didn’t receive a diamond from Mr. Taylor, what will that do to this case Alpha?? Does that mean everything the prosecutors told us are LIES?? Meaning we pack up and shut the case down since we are been told this is a CENTRAL PIECE to their case….

        1. Noko4, I am not saying any of the things that you have suggested in this post. Note that i am not taking a position on the prosecution application. I was only responding to a question from another reader who wanted to know what the implications would be if it is indeed found out that Mr. Taylor did give the diamond to Ms. Campbell. My response was based purely on that question and then trying to put into context what the prosecutors would seek to make out of it (assuming only that the diamond was given). I even added that it is a wait and see game and a lot will depend on how prosecutors lead the evidence and how defense lawyers cross-examine the witnesses. At the end of the day, it will be left with the judges to determine what the impact of it all, whether the diamond was given or not, will be on the entire case. So please note that my comment was in response to a particular question–ie, if it is established that the prosecution claim is true.


  7. The Prosecution must really be desperate to try to use judicial means to get Naomi Cambell to com to the Court to testify. Even if she does testify that men went to her and offered her a dismond, claiming that it was Taylor who sent them, what is the proof that indeed it was Mr Taylor who actually sent them? This is preposterous and bordering on malversation for anyone to perpend that this is proof of guilt.
    I hope the Honorable Judges also realises the total desperation of the Prosecution that would make them go to this extend.
    I need some Claration here Tracey, is this allowed under the rules of the Court for the Prosecution to bring witnesses after they have rested? Where does it end?

    1. Helen,
      Tracey is away for a few days and she will only be able to respond to questions when she is back. But to throw light on your question, the prosecution motion itself states that while the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Special Court do not make any provision or afford any “right” to the prosecution to reopen its case, “international jurisprudence allows for such a possibility in certain circumstances.” The motion goes on to reference relevant case law in other international criminal tribunals where judges have allowed prosecutors to reopen their case or to bring evidence in rebuttal. So there is actually precedence in other tribunals where such a thing has been allowed. Whether the same circumstances apply to the present case before the court, that will be left with the judges to decide. So it’s a wait and see game for all of us at this point.

      I hope this explanation is helpful.


      1. Alpha,

        Is this what you call International Justice? Do you think this is an International Justice case? Some of us are demanding that they make or elevate this “fake court” to that of an international status and you and this fake moderator, Tracey Gurd, have no record of sounding like us. Do you know or have any idea why they are refusing to make or elevate this fake court to the status of the ICC? It is because they don’t want their soldiers or people to be tried by you Alpha and other Africans. When will you guys learn? This is a fake court. Show me which International Special court or a sovereign country court this kind of thing is going to happen; especially, when they, the prosecutors and the court, have already made their rules without the input of the accused and the defense, and still they continue to change the rules at the end of the trial. However, Alpha, it means they the prosecutors did not have the evidence on diamonds as they wanted us to believe when they made that self negating inexplicably pronouncement that this innocent man took the Sierra Leoneans diamonds. Bear in mind now, Naomi Campbell has already said she did not receive any diamonds from this innocent man. Do you remember that?

        1. Noko4,
          Unfortunately, i cannot take a definite position on a matter that is yet to be decided by the judges. Like i said in my earlier comments on the subject, it is still a wait and see game for all of us.

        2. Alpha….can you take a PARTIAL POSITION since you cannot take ” a definite position”??

          1. Noko4,
            As long as the matter is yet to be decided by the judges, it will be unprofessional for me to take any position, whether definite or partial.

        3. Alpha,
          Are you pulling Traceyism on us too??? Watching the trial but have NO IDEAL??

  8. Bravo Dehmie, you wouldn’t have said it better. I’m so impressed with your recollection of events a little over a decade old. I salute you brother, you are not the likes of Blah and crazy Ziza Maza. Yes indeed something good can come from Nimba County. Bravo…Bravo…Bravo.

    Harris K Johnson

  9. these prosecutors have nothing in hands and they desperate to find something anything to nail Taylor. i mean here are people who claimed aloud that Taylor is mastermind of sierra leane war and yet are unable to prove it. it is just pathetic!

  10. Hi,
    My attention has been drawn to the prosecution request to produce addtional witnesses. Does this mean that they sense they have no case and are trying to find one? I have not been writing but have tried to follow the Taylor trial as a Liberian. Over the years, the dull prosecution team has always gone back and forth on issues that make absolutely no sense. This is a clear example. I can not just understand why they want to call a lady who has said she did not receive any diamond from Taylor. I do not support all /any destructions that happend in my country, Liberia by the NPFL and other waring factions. But I think the Taylor trial is more political than legal and the judges should look into this with sufficient objectivity. The defense team must not allow this to pass bye. Please act now, defense.

    1. MOMOLU,
      You couldn’t had said it better than that brother! This is what we have been saying all along that the people of Sierra Leone got no case against Mr. Taylor as they have been made to believed! The trial of Mr. Taylor is political and it’s done to protect those who are responsible for the problem in Sierra Leone!

    2. Momolu,
      They don’t SENSE…they KNOW they had and have NO CASE from day one!!!!

      Now guess what, this Special Court is now patrolling Liberia testing the waters…I guess Liberia is on the way for a Special Court as planned by former prosecutor David Crane.

    1. Aki,
      You believe Ms. Teage will bring such in here…GOOD LUCK. I will like to know her take on this move by the prosecutors to bring in MORE witnesses after resting for the second time.

  11. After these three witnesses,what’s coming up again? Are they going to lord knows where to fine allothers he given gifts to? Why can they call madame papa and ask her about the money she supported him with to get these diamonds?we must be thinkin buildin our country now for our childen.spending all this money on this so called trial. That taylor alone fought and killed.why are we so hateful and blind in that country, the way I seening it ,all the piracy that fought this war and supported are in there stealin more then the others but we can not see them. Let us wake up now and see how the others afcrian country are buildin up,we going down. They taken that money given it to their own people ,an those they want .tell us they helping by puttin taylor on trial to us happy. And still supporting wars in other countrys.what a fool they know how to make out of people.if u let then. So liberians ,let us wake. Look at this trial. Think again love our country and one an others.

  12. Ms.campbell and others are not what they thinking. prosecutors likes to play with people’s minds they think they will get some answers that they havein got.playing with minds an making fool out of u. That’s what they prove. Not everyone will go for that.

  13. Each and every time I hear someone say Liberia does not have diamonds, I smile. I attended School at the Booker T. washington Institute for four years. All you had to do was head towards Bong Mines. About a quarter mile after Miss Moore’s Mission, what did you run into? Diamond fields on the right and left side of the road. Nimba County had a Diamond Commissioner and what purpose did he serve? Anyone ever heard of Lofa Bridge? What is mined at Lofa Bridge between Bomi Hills and Mano River? Diamonds. Anyone ever heard of Arthington, Charles taylor’s home? Well, head towards Boika’s Town, Make a left turn and head towards Lockett’s Town. For as far as the eyes can see, it is all pits. People are mining gold and diamonds dialy. This has been going on forever, including Liberian Government Officials. So, to say, Liberia has no diamond is a joke. In the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s and up to today’s date, Diamond was and is being sold on Benson Street, Newport Street,. Broad Street, carey Street, Camp Johnson Road, Sinkor, kakata, Bong Mines, Vai Town, Duala, Bassa, Nimba, Lofa, Bomi, Lofa Bridge, Mano River, Cape Mount, Bo Waterside and other parts of Liberia.

    If Taylor give Ms. Campbell a Diamond, can anyone say for sure the allerged Diamond was from Sierra Leone, Liberia, or another part of the world? Ms. Campbell should not show up in Court and If she does, say nothing. I don’t have to tell her what to do… she knows. Ms. Hollis had her chance and she blew it.

    1. Abe, you forgot to also mention the main diamond field, located at white flower mansion, where taylor resided. therefore, I agree with you that the diamond given to Naomi could probably be from there too. But then listen to this: Prosecution would still attribute it to diamonds brought to taylor by Sam Boakarie, don’t you think so, Abe? Man, why you brothers continue this old African politics of distortions of facts and twisting of logics to satisfy your immediate whims? You guys need lots of schooling than politics, because it may help you and the building of your tartered economy and infrastructure damaged by your hero,charles!

      1. Fallah,
        For the prosecutors to jump that high, they will have to produce a witness in FIRST PERSON instead of HEARSAY…..

        Did anyone closer said he or Sam gave Mr. Taylor diamond??

    2. I don’t think that anyone is seriously doubting Liberia’s ability to produce diamonds. The issue is that during the conflict in Sierra Leone, Liberia’s diamond exports grew by something like 300 percent. Experts wondered how Liberia alone could produce so many diamonds given its limited fields.

    3. Abe Lincoln,
      Not Just Lofa bridge alone, you have Smith Camp, WAsuah, Takpelma, Henry-Town These areas are in lower Lofa County around the Lofa bridge area going to where is now known as Kpanpolu County! Those who so believed that all the diamonds coming during Mr. Taylor presidency are not educated about Liberia at all!
      Even during this trial, I think it was in July or August when they displace a map of liberia showing the locations of diamond deposites in Liberia! But still all the diamonds in those areas are from Sierra Leone when infact you Sierra Leoneans mining diamonds in Liberia! Go to Borbor Soko diamonds field in Bensonville, Todee,behind Number 7 and Caresbury, you will see Sierra Leoneans there working on those diamond fields! Are those mines in the Republice of Sierra Leone? Of course not! These diamond mines were operating before the war and continued to operated during Mr. Taylor days as President and they still do today!
      If only Sierra Leone had diamonds, why do they have diamond mines all over in Liberia? This case is a fake, it is a disgrace to man kind in the so-called name of Justice!

  14. I beg to differ J. Fallah Menjor, firstly, I believe you need to have a little more indepth history on Liberia -schooling included. Now, according to you, Mr. Taylor was living on and in the Main Diamond field in the Republic of Liberia… if this is/was true how come the previous owner Mr. Lawrence Morgan did not find any such gems on the property? So in other words Taylor began to sprout diamonds in his back yard? Wow, Taylor makes Houdini look like a foul. Please don’t conduct your research like Ms. Hollis, let speak the truth, know the truth and conclude this matter!

    1. J. Fallah Menjor,
      Your two posts of 2010/05/25 at 3:44 and 5:09pm have not been approved because of an adjective used to describe the accused. The word starts with the letter “L.” If you can get rid of that adjective or rephrase, your comment will be approved immediately.

      1. My brother, Morris Kanneh, has already nailed that point for me. I am satisfied and don’t need to rephrase. I come up with fresh ideas and arguements as things unfold in this trial of the centry; Charles vs Sierra Leone. I am loving each revelation on this man! I pray for him each day to………Amen!

  15. Let these prosecutors fine something better to talk about now then this diamond.they could not fine money, now this diamond.there is no case here. Sierre leones stole. Diamonds from their own people and sold all over the world.some to our big brothersthem for sure,some of us know this. Now ever thing is dumped on taylor .just like he fought this war alone.all ropes has an end,so this too should pass.hope taylor will be at that good end. so just drop this diamonds porsecutors. They brough all this war matter on us ,all liberians are fools .some way or an other we wanted this. War, and when it did not go their way the big brothers turn their backs .now the on the same man they needed.maybe taylor should have given them what they they want to show all of have this world in their hands. I know for sure, it is god not them.

  16. And in regard to the prosecution’s application to call additional witnesses, what took them so long?? They should have called Ms. Campbell much earlier during the prosecution phase. The prosecution claims they were “unaware” of this evidence?? It will be interesting to see what happens.

    1. They didn’t know before they went on asking Mr. Taylor about it while he was on the witness stand? Common people, they can’t be serious!

  17. Jose Rodriguez,
    What do you gain by your continue and ceaseless attacks on the hard working moderators of this forum? Can’t you see that your paranoid prattling has not and will not deter Tracey or Alpha from doing the great jobs they are doing?
    You must stop the huffing and puffing and face the fact Tracey and Alpha are here to stay and no amount of uncalled for attack will swerve them do your bidding.
    We remain grateful to Alpha and Tracey for the great job they are doing, we will keep praying for them and praising God for them.

    1. Morris Kannah,

      Some of us will never compromise to uphold what is right. There is no attacks by me. I stand by what I say. However, we are just stating the obvious and putting Tracey and Alpha on notice and we are being on record. So buddy, if you don’t like it, tell them to be fair and balanced, or at least try to make a fair and balanced. One more thing boss. Be advised that these two individuals are not doing us a favor. They are being paid for the job that they are doing by taxpayer, charity and ect dollars. However, they are not working for free.

  18. Mr. Alpha Sesay,
    I have done what you asked only because I appreciate the great job you are doing. Nevertheless, I vehemently oppose, and respectfully disagree with your refusal to post my response to Jose and beg to differ with the reasons given.
    Calling Taylor a murderer, looter and rapist besides being my personal opinion and being an eye witness to the looting, rapes and murders perpetuated by the NPFL under the watchful eyes of Taylor, there are sufficient evidence to my claim. The Liberian TRC report, the BBC, VOA, Human Right Watch, Amnesty International, the UNO and many other credible organizations both local and Internationally attest to the uncomfortable fact that Taylor presided over the brutal murder, systematic rape and wholesale robbery of Liberia. Whether Taylor is responsible for murder, rape or loot in Sierra Leone is debatable. What is never debatable is his devilish acts in Liberia. Even the staunchest supporters of Taylor find it insurmountable denying that Taylor masterminded the taken away of the lives of over 10% of Liberia entire population, supervised the raping of over 30% of the women of Liberia and instructed his hooligans to loot as bounty. If such person can not be call a murderer, rapist and looter then someone need to educate me on the meaning of murderer, rapist and looter.
    I hope you are not suggesting that one cannot rely to his own his own account of events or on evidence from highly reputable institutions to make claims.

Comments are closed.