However, if I must grade this report on its own merits, I would question some of it analysis which I find to support the prosecution case. The issue of the court being lenient with Taylor is a foul cry from reality, and the issue of Taylor inconsistency with his support, for RUF, during the period of 191-92 is not logical. I do agree that Taylor stray off on numerous occassion and provided some information that had no relevance to the case, and sometimes provided answers that he was not asked. On the issue of questioning some witnesses education, I also agree with this analysis.

Nonetheless, I will give the UC Berkeley people an execellent grade for dealing with the more critical issue that the prosecution, so far, have failed to impeach the credibility of Mr. Taylor. Mr. Taylor , has so far, appear to be a credibile witness in his own defense, and if this case was decided today, he should be free to return to his homeland. Good report worth reading.

Happy! Happy New Year!!!

Excellent points. Good observation and catch. Keep it up brother.

U.C. Berkeley Monitoring Program,
Mr. Taylor said that between 1991 and 1992 the NPFL and the RUF cooperated to secure the Liberian/Sierra Leonean border against ULIMO on off attacks in Liberia. The U.C. Berkeley Monitor also stated to fight ULIMO together; this is not correct and gives the wrong impression, to readers what Mr. Taylor actually maintained about his relationship with the RUF 1991-1992.

Mr. Taylor acknowledged that the NPFL provided the RUF with small amounts of ammunition for there joint border security. In the letter that was written by Mr. Sankoh, he was the one complaining to Mr. Taylor about the amount of ammunition that was provided to the RUF and requested more ammunition for this joint border security operation. Mr. Taylor noted that in fact he had sufficient ammunition available, and could have increased the amount of ammunition to the RUF if he had wanted to.

I do not see the deception, manipulation or inconsistency in Mr. Taylor statements. The NPFL and RUF cooperated to secure the Liberian/Sierra Leonean border against ULIMO on off attacks in Liberia. It was not to help the RUF invaded Sierra Leone.

Mr. Sankoh may have wanted more ammunition for his plan incursion of Sierra Leone but Mr. Taylor plan was for border security only. I think Mr. Taylor had an ideal of Mr. Sankoh plans and refuse to supply the RUF with their demand for more ammunition for the stated reasons, the NPFL did not have a strategic objective in the conflict in Sierra Leone and the NPFL barely had enough ammunition for their own cause.

It this inconsistency the U.C. Berkeley Monitoring Program say Mr. Taylor made during the his testimony would be brought up I am sure those learned judges will see it the same way I do since there have not been any evidence presented by the prosecution to say other wise.

Thanks as usual. To answer your question on whether I know of links or websites, I do not know of any as of yet.

Happy New Year also.
You are right. Notwithstanding, you also have every reason to express your shepticism about the report. However, let’s give the University the benefit of the doubts for now. Nevertheless, I would have liked to read and with fascinating and peculiar interest, if they had touched on the procees and arrangement, that led to the subsequent indictment of a sitting president, arrest, and try by hybrid laws of a court that is not recognized by the Republic of Liberia and not a UN court.