Gregory Afoko and Adams Mahama
A Forensic Toxicologist and Chemist at the Ghana Standards Authority (GSA), Peter Quartey Papafio, has confirmed to an Accra High Court hearing the case of Gregory Afoko that the substance that was poured on the late Upper East Regional chairman of the New Patriotic Party (NPP) Adams Mahama was sulphuric acid.
Mr. Papafio who analyzed the substance as well as other samples submitted by the police for testing, told the court that the substance tested positive for sulphuric acid with 16.89 molar with 90 to 95 percent purity.
“Sulphuric acid with the above concentration was detected in the liquid substance of exhibit A (gallon containing acid). It is very corrosive and causes severe injury upon contact with the skin. Due to the corrosive nature of sulphuric acid it can cause death upon contact”, the court heard.
Mr. Papafio who is the tenth prosecution witness in the trial told the court that on May 28, 2015, he received some samples/exhibits from the CID Headquarters from an investigator, Detective Chief Inspector Augustus Nkrumah.
He said the exhibits were sealed with a Ghana Police Service seal and he was to perform examination on the sample and issue a report based on the findings.
Led in his evidence-in-chief by Mathew Amponsah, a chief state attorney, the witness told the court that there were eight separate exhibits which the analyst designated as exhibits A to H.
The exhibits, he said, included a gallon with liquid suspected to be acid, carpet from Adams’ vehicle, a pair of shoes belonging to Adams and his dress and burnt foam material of a car seat.
The rest were burnt pieces of material soaked with liquid substance, transparent zip lock bag found in the car, track suit belonging to Afoko and a plastic cup suspected to have been used in pouring the acid.
He said he did the analysis on May 29, 2015 and wrote his report June 1, 2015.
Mr. Papafio told the court that after his analysis, all the exhibits had residues and traces of sulphuric acid and traced to the content in the gallon which was sulphuric acid.
He stated that a track suit which had acid burns and is said to belong to Afoko also had traces of the acid which is the same as the acid in the gallon which was allegedly poured on the late Adams Mahama.
He added that the deterioration of the deceased person’s clothes and shoes are also linked to the action of the corrosive nature of the concentrated sulphuric acid.
Mr. Papafio who has been working with the GSA for the past 12 years, tendered in evidence the analytical report titled ‘Test Examination, RE: Murder Of Adams Mahama’ and it was admitted as Exhibit E with no objection from the defence counsel.
Cross-examination
The cross-examination by defence counsel, Osafo Buaben focused much on the said acid burnt track suit which is said to belong to Afoko.
He said the sulphuric acid could not burn the track suit because it was a rain coat and the acid could only cause stains because of the texture. But the witness responded by saying the track suit was a nylon polyester track suit hence the burn.
The lawyer argued that Afoko was a motor rider and the burn of the lower part of the track suit was caused by the hot exhaust pipe of his motor cycle.
This the witness refuted saying “It is highly improbable to cause those burns but as to whether they are burns from the motor cycle I would not know”.
“I am putting it to you that there were no traces of sulphuric acid on the track suit of the accused”, the lawyer insisted.
“It tested positive for traces of sulphuric acid and upon further test it was confirmed to be sulphate ions indicating that the residues are from sulphuric acid”, the witness maintained.
The defence lawyer also challenged the witness that he had no basis to state in his report that the residues of sulphuric acid on all the other exhibits he received can be traced back to the content of the gallon.
But the witness stressed that “Exhibit A (acid in the gallon) had the liquid substance and after proving positive for sulphuric the remaining exhibits were also found to have residues of exhibits A. Therefore the conclusion that they can be traced to the content of exhibit A is legitimate.”
Mr. Papafio also rejected claims from the lawyer that he went beyond his terms of reference from the police by indicating that all the exhibits had traces of the acid in the gallon.
The case has been adjourned to June 11, 2018.
BY Gibril Abdul Razak