Asamankese (E/R), Sept. 21, GNA - Issah Alhassan, the man who attempted to dupe the newly-appointed West Akyem District Chief Executive, Mr Kwabena Sintim-Aboagye by lying to him that his predecessor, Mr Umar Amoah, had contracted him to kill him has been sentenced to a three-million-cedi fine by the Asamankese Circuit Court on Monday.
Alhassan, 51, who succeeded in collecting 50,000 cedis from the DCE for leaking the information of the "plot", would go to prison for 12 months if he failed to pay the amount.
The accused escaped going to prison for three years, thanks to the 11th hour intervention from the Member of Parliament for Lower Akyem Constituency, Mr James Apietu-Ankrah, who appealed to the Judge, Mr Kofi Akrowiah, to be allowed to withdraw the case for settlement and reconciliation between Alhassan and Mr Sintim-Aboagye. Facts of the case as presented by the Prosecutor, Police Chief Inspector, Joseph Idan, was that on July 29, Alhassan went to the residence of Mr Sintim-Aboagye, showed him a talisman which he said was received from the former DCE for burial at a public cemetery to effect his death.
Having "leaked" the information for which he received 50,000 cedis he returned to the DCE five days later with a concocted story, which he said was also meant to facilitate the death plan.
Mr Sintim-Aboakye not satisfied, took Alhassan to the Asamankese chief's palace where he was asked to confirm the plot but surprisingly, he told the gathering that he fabricated the issue only for financial reward from the new DCE and was handed over to the Police.
In his judgment, Mr Akrowiah said he appreciated the efforts of the MP to reconcile the accused and the DCE and therefore was taking into consideration the results of the settlement as a mitigating factor. Mr Akrowiah said habits like what Alhassan exhibited should not be countenanced and said he would have wished to give the accused a custodial sentence, even though the offence was a misdemeanour as the law permitted him to sentence him to a term up to three years imprisonment.
He noted that the accused had already been in remand for three weeks after his conviction and he did not want to mar the effect of the steps taken at reconciliation as that was also permitted under the law.