By Kemeseng Sanneh (Kexx)
The High Court in Banjul has sentenced Mario Mendy to life imprisonment for the murder of Maram Jaw, whom he was found guilty of stabbing to death with a knife in Kerewan Village on May 11, 2021.
Justice ZN Mboob delivered the judgment on Tuesday, finding that the prosecution had proven its case beyond reasonable doubt. Mendy was charged with a single count of murder under Section 187 of the Criminal Code. He pleaded not guilty when arraigned on March 8, 2022.
The prosecution called 13 witnesses and tendered four exhibits to support its case, including a forensic DNA report linking blood found on a pestle and a shoe to the deceased. The court heard that the body of the deceased was discovered behind her bed and a blood-stained shoe was recovered from under the bed of a witness’s daughter.
A key piece of evidence was the DNA analysis report (Exhibit Q), which indicated with 99.999% probability that the blood on the items belonged to the deceased, matching her mother’s DNA profile.
The defence challenged the prosecution’s evidence, arguing that there was no eyewitness testimony linking Mendy to the crime and that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient and inconsistent. They raised concerns about the forensic process, including the timing and supervision of the DNA sample collection, and questioned the admissibility of the DNA report under Section 94(3) of the Evidence Act.
Defence counsel argued that another witness (PW3) was last seen with the deceased, not the accused, and that witness testimonies placed Mendy elsewhere at the time of the incident. They also highlighted contradictions in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, particularly regarding the visibility of bloodstains on the accused’s shoe.
The prosecution maintained that the evidence, particularly the DNA report, proved that Mendy committed the murder with malice aforethought. They relied on circumstantial evidence and the doctrine of “last seen,” arguing that Mendy failed to provide a credible explanation for the presence of the deceased’s blood on his shoes.
Justice Mboob ruled that the prosecution had successfully established all elements of the offence, including unlawful killing and intent. She noted that Mendy failed to provide a credible explanation for the presence of the deceased’s blood on his shoes and described the act as deliberate and violent.
In sentencing, Justice Mboob considered the gravity of the offence, the irreparable harm caused, and the breach of trust involved. However, she also took into account the defence’s plea in mitigation, including Mendy’s lack of previous convictions, his youth, and the possibility of rehabilitation.
“Murder is one of the most heinous offences known to our law,” the judge said. While Section 188 of the Criminal Code provides for the death penalty, Justice Mboob said she was persuaded that justice would be better served by imposing a life sentence.
The court accordingly sentenced Mario Mendy to life imprisonment. Both parties reserved the right to appeal.
