5 Reasons Why Anas Certainly Won: Retired Judge Addresses

Did Anas Really Win? Retired Appeal's Court Judge Addresses Mistrial Allegations in US Defamation Case

Retired Court of Appeal Judge Isaac Duose has shed light on the defamation case between investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas and former Member of Parliament Kennedy Agyapong. Duose stated that claims of a mistrial in the case, which resulted in an $18 million damages award to Anas, are inaccurate

According to Duose, if any errors had occurred that would have led to a mistrial, the presiding judge would have explicitly mentioned it. He emphasised that there would have been no reason for the judge to delay or wait if there were grounds for declaring a mistrial. “If the jury made any significant error that would lead to a mistrial, the judge would have said it immediately,” Duose explained ¹.

Duose believes that Agyapong’s team is propagating the claims of a mistrial. He advised Agyapong’s legal team to file an application to substantiate their claims of a mistrial if they continue to uphold that position. “They have to put in an application and prove that there was a mistrial. The judge himself, on the spur of the moment, would have declared that there was a mistrial and then discharged the jury,” Duose said ¹.

The defamation lawsuit, filed on May 17, 2022, in the Essex County Superior Court, accused Agyapong and media personality Frederick Asamoah of making defamatory statements about Anas during an episode of The Daddy Fred Show. Agyapong allegedly made false and damaging claims, including accusing Anas of being a criminal, a thief, and responsible for the murder of investigative journalist Ahmed Suale¹.

Some individuals have suggested that the case was a mistrial and that reports claiming the judge awarded $18 million in favour of Anas were false. However, Duose’s expertise and insights provide clarity on the matter, emphasising that the judge would have declared a mistrial if there were any errors or irregularities ¹.

In conclusion, Duose’s statement provides valuable context to the defamation case between Anas and Agyapong. His expertise as a retired Court of Appeal judge lends credibility to his assertion that claims of a mistrial are inaccurate. As the legal community continues to scrutinise the case, Duose’s insights serve as a reminder of the importance of understanding the legal process and the role of judges in ensuring justice is served.