By: Cecilia E.L Mendy
Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of Banjul High Court on Monday 29th June, convicted and sentenced Ismaila Janneh to death after he was found guilty of murder case involving late Alieu Jallow.
When the case was called shortly before the verdict, Counsel M. Sarr announced his appearance for the State, while Counsel C.U Uduma appeared for the accused person.
According to court records, on 12th February, 2024, the accused person was charged with the offence of murder contrary to Section 187 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 10:01, Volume 3 of the Laws of The Gambia. The particulars of the offence alleged that the accused person, Ismaila Janneh, on or about 27th day of December 2023 at Brufut Ghana Town, Kombo North District, West Coast Region, with malice aforethought, caused the death of Alieu Jallow by stabbing him with a knife, thereby committing the offence of murder.
The accused person was arraigned before Justice Jaiteh on the 18th of March 2024, when the charge was read and explained to him. He pleaded not guilty, thereby putting the prosecution to strict proof of every essential element of the offence charged. During the trial, the prosecution, in an effort to discharge the burden of proof imposed upon it by law, called five (5) witnesses and tendered several documentary and real exhibits in support of its case.
During the trial, Ismaila Janneh testified as Defense Witness (DW) 1 giving evidence in his own defence and stated that he resided in Brusubi. He acknowledged that he was before the court on a charge of murder but denied committing the offence. DW1 testified that he did not murder the deceased, Alieu Jallow. According to him, the incident stemmed from an earlier dispute over two mobile phones and D1, 200.00. He stated that sometime in December 2023, at about 9:00 p.m, while travelling from Brufut his home, he was allegedly attacked by the deceased, Alieu Jallow, and Baboucarr Manneh at the Ghana Town Bridge.
He claimed that during the attack, the deceased and Baboucarr took two mobile phones from him, one of which was an Itel phone, together with D1, 200.00 cash. DW1 stated that the following day, he went to the PIU Office at Ghana Town and reported the alleged attack and theft to an officer on duty. He testified that the officer did not take any meaningful action on the complaint.
DW1 further testified that a day or two later he saw one of his missing mobile phones in the deceased’s possession. He reported the matter again to the PIU Station, where the deceased was called and questioned. According to DW1, the deceased initially admitted the phone was his but later denied it belonged to DW1. DW1 stated that the police eventually took the phone from the deceased and returned it to him.
DW1 testified that about five days later he saw the second missing mobile phone in the possession of a man called Woja, whom he described as a bartender and an elder of the deceased. He confronted Woja and told him he recognized the phone as his own. According to DW1, Woja first claimed he had bought the phone in Serrekunda, and later said he had bought it at the Turntable. DW1 asked him to take him to the shop where he allegedly bought the phone so he could verify the claim, but Woja did not give a clear response and appeared to become angry. DW1 then went to the police station and reported the matter.
Under cross examination, DW1 Ismaila, admitted that he knew the deceased and that he believed the deceased had stolen his mobile phone. He further admitted that this belief formed the basis of his disagreement with the deceased. He also confirmed that he had reported the phone dispute to the police. DW1 admitted that on the day of the incident he was at the Brufut Ghana Town football field, which he accepted was a public place. He also accepted that people may have seen him there. However, he denied initially meeting the deceased there and denied the suggestion that he had gone to the field armed with a knife.
DW1 rejected the suggestion that his account before the Court was an afterthought. He maintained that everything he had narrated was true. He further denied the prosecution’s case that he threatened the deceased with a knife, stabbed him over the phone dispute, and thereby caused his death. DW1 also denied knowing, at the time, that the deceased had died from stab wounds. He stated that he only became aware of that allegation in court. He maintained that he did not fight the deceased, but rather that the deceased came and fought with him. Finally, he denied the prosecution’s suggestion that his actions directly caused the deceased’s death.
Justice Jaiteh declared that accordingly, pursuant to Section 188 of the Criminal Code, the convict, Ismaila Janneh, was thereby sentenced to death. Pursuant to Section 28 of the Criminal Code, the Justice Minister shall issue instructions as to the manner in which the sentence shall be carried out and Pursuant to Section 251 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the convict was thereby reminded of his right to appeal against both conviction and sentence.
About the Author
