By: Tiana Cole | HGP Nightly news |
Day 47 of the Election Fraud Trial unfolded on Thursday with vigorous legal exchanges, as defence attorneys challenged the admissibility of key spreadsheet evidence compiled by a prosecution witness.
The hearing continued before Acting Chief Magistrate Faith McGusty at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court, where prosecution witness Bibi Anieshaw Mohamed returned to the stand. Mohamed testified that she created several spreadsheets using election data that had been publicly posted on the GECOM website and later submitted them to investigators on August 24, 2020.
However, when the Prosecution attempted to tender those spreadsheets into evidence, Defence Attorney Nigel Hughes objected strongly. He argued that Mohamed was effectively presenting documents she created using spreadsheet software, but had not been established as an expert capable of generating or interpreting such data in a forensic context.
Hughes stressed that the court must first determine Mohamed’s expertise before admitting the documents. He further argued that the Defence is now disadvantaged because the original GECOM data Mohamed referenced is no longer available online for verification.
The Defence contended that because spreadsheets use formulas entered by the creator, the court cannot properly assess the validity or accuracy of the results without knowing what data inputs or formulas Mohamed applied.
“Without establishing her as an expert, the Defence cannot meaningfully cross-examine her or test the reliability of the spreadsheets,” Hughes told the court.
The Prosecution countered that the data was extracted directly from GECOM’s publicly posted information at the time and that Statements of Poll (SOPs) will later be produced to substantiate Mohamed’s spreadsheet summaries.
Nonetheless, Hughes maintained that the spreadsheets remain inadmissible until proper evidentiary foundation is laid, and noted that the Defence cannot compare SOPs to spreadsheet results that have not been lawfully admitted.
Prosecutor Tometh Steffin-King, KC, added that a handwriting expert is expected to testify on the authenticity of signatures appearing on the SOPs.
Following the arguments, the court proceeded to a voir dire to determine whether Mohamed qualifies as an expert witness. She was extensively cross-examined by Hughes during this process.
The matter is scheduled to resume on November 28, 2025, when the court is expected to decide on the admissibility of the spreadsheet evidence and continue the trial.
