Police fail to link terror suspect to Pangani bomber

Investigators have have acknowledged that they failed to establish a connection between a terrorist who died in a car explosion at the Pangani Police Station and the man facing trial over the incident.

Chief investigator Cyrus Ikade conceded during cross examination on Wednesday that he did not establish a link between Mr Ahmed Dugal Ali, the owner of the ill-fated saloon car, and Mr Hajir Abdow Kassim, who blew himself up in the car on April 24.

Mr Ikade admitted that the owner of the car presented himself to anti-terrorism police officers after the incident, and that there had been no intention to disguise the particulars of ownership of the vehicle that revealed it belonged to him and his wife.

RECOVERED PISTOL

Mr Ikade also agreed that a pistol recovered from the debris of the explosion was not proof that the driver of the vehicle, one Mr Abbass, who was Mr Dugal's cousin, was armed.

The gun may have belonged to the passenger, who detonated the bomb while seated in the back seat behind the driver, Mr Ikade conceded.

The witness said the police did not find traces of explosives in the items found in Mr Dugal’s house that also included Mr Abass's personal effects.

“I put it to you that your investigations were poor and inconclusive as you have testified before court that you did not establish any connection between the passenger in the vehicle and Mr Dugal,” said Mbugua Mureithi, a lawyer defending the suspect.

NO CONNECTION

He also said no connection was established either between the driver of the vehicle and his passenger besides the fact that they were in one car.

“You have not told the court what you found to be the particulars of Hajir Kassim, apart from telling us that he was a Kenyan...” the lawyer argued.

He said that besides the fact that Mr Dugal owned the vehicle, the prosecution had not proved that he had knowledge of how it was used on the material day apart from the trip it made to a hospital to ferry a patient for treatment.

“On the date of the explosion, Mr Dugal had given the vehicle to his deceased cousin to take a patient to hospital, and the police confirmed this. The only reason he is on trial is the fact that he owned the vehicle.

BURDEN OF PROOF

"The prosecution has not established the circumstances under which the passenger, who it says was believed to be terrorist, ended up in Mr Dugal’s car,” the lawyer said, adding that the “burden of proof cannot be shifted to the defence.”

“They have not endeavoured to show whether the vehicle was hired or whether the driver and Mr Dugal belonged to a terrorist cell,” Mr Mbugua said.

Mr Mbugua claimed the witness had withheld crucial information from the court.

In his examination-in-chief, Mr Ikade said the car was laden with explosives, which were triggered remotely by a cell phone.

The hearing continues.