A new twist has emerged in the ongoing case involving the theft of a substantial amount of money from the residence of former Minister of Sanitation and Water Resources, Cecilia Dapaah.
A report from myjoyonline.com has revealed that the police failed to inform the Attorney General about the initial case the former minister filed against one of her house helps at the Juvenile Court. The case took an unexpected turn when a Ghana Card played a significant role.
The case timeline:
The report detailed the sequence of events that led to the case’s unfolding. In October 2022, Cecilia Dapaah warned a domestic staff member not to enter certain rooms in her house, but the warning was ignored. A few days later, the domestic worker was caught entering a restricted room by the minister’s husband. The domestic staff was reported to the police and taken to the Domestic Violence and Victim Support Unit.
During this period, Cecilia Dapaah conducted her own investigation and discovered missing items, including kente cloths, women’s clothes, money, and jewelry from the room. Charges were filed against the domestic worker, and she was taken to the Circuit Court in October 2022.
Age determination and Ghana Card factor:
At the Circuit Court, it was determined that the domestic staff’s age was estimated to be between 18 and 21. However, during the proceedings, the domestic worker’s lawyers presented her Ghana Card, which indicated that she was 17 at the time. This led to her discharge from the Circuit Court and the case being referred to the Juvenile Court due to her age.
The case continued at the Juvenile Court, and she turned 18 in the interim. Eventually, the case was sent back to the Circuit Court in 2023 when she was of legal age.
The new charges and revelations:
Interestingly, during the time the case was at the Juvenile Court and the Circuit Court in 2022, there was no mention of the missing $1 million, suits, and other currency amounts as outlined in court documents filed against the same suspect and four others in July 2023. The police initially limited the charges to unlawful entry and being on the premises for unlawful purposes, instead of charging her with stealing.
The new developments have raised questions about the progression and handling of the case, particularly concerning the missing items and monetary amounts that were not initially mentioned in the proceedings.
