By Kemeseng Sanneh (Kexx)
The credibility of a key prosecution witness came under sharp scrutiny in the fatal police shooting case as defence lawyers used Africell call log data to cast doubt on his whereabouts at the time of the September 13, 2023 shooting that left three officers dead.
Omar S. Jallow, a soldier in the Gambia Armed Forces, appeared before Justice Jaiteh of the High Court, where he was cross-examined extensively by defence counsel Lamin J. Darboe. The crux of the defence argument revolved around whether Jallow was actually at the crime scene when the fatal shooting occurred — or whether his testimony was constructed after the fact.
The issue gained legal traction when counsel Darboe tendered Africell call log data, which placed Jallow’s mobile activity at a location far from the Sukuta-Jabang junction at the critical moments.
“We were taken by a lift from Palma Rima to Sukuta-Jabang traffic light,” Jallow claimed during questioning. He added that he was with fellow soldiers, Ismaila and Bakary Jarju, when they stopped to buy “Afra” (a local grilled meat dish). “While we were eating, we heard a gunshot, then another. I rushed towards the sound and saw one officer down, another shot, and the female PIU officer tried to move towards her colleagues before she too was shot.”
But defence counsel Darboe countered with the Africell call log: “The call log shows that your phone was connecting through a tower in the Sara area near Sukuta-Latrikunda Highway at 20:15. That’s nearly two kilometers away from the Sukuta-Jabang traffic light. Were you really there when the incident happened?”
“I can’t recall which line I used,” Jallow responded, acknowledging that he uses two SIM cards. When handed a printout of the call log, Jallow confirmed the number was his.
The court admitted the Africell call log into evidence as Defence Exhibit D36, despite objections by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), A.M. Yusuf, who argued that proper notice had not been given for its production. Justice Jaiteh overruled the objection.
Counsel Darboe continued to press the witness: “You said you were buying Afra and then heard gunshots. But the call you made at 20:15 shows you were not in that vicinity. I put it to you that you were not at the traffic lights until after Bakary Jarju called you.”
“That’s not true,” Jallow insisted. “I saw the shooter with my own eyes. He wore a white kaftan. After he shot the officers, he fled toward Sukuta and turned at the first junction. I chased him for a while but stopped because I wasn’t armed. It wouldn’t be professional.”
Yet under cross-examination from defence counsel Adama Sillah, more inconsistencies emerged.
“Did you recognise the face of the shooter?” Sillah asked.
“No, I didn’t see his face,” Jallow replied. “But he was accurate. He shot five times. He was definitely a professional.”
“You are a firearms instructor,” Sillah noted. “Did you pick up the officer’s gun when you saw him down?”
“No,” Jallow replied. “I was in battle shock. My military ideas ran away.”
“Did you at any point report the incident to your commanding officers?” Sillah asked.
“Yes. We reported to military police, and we were taken to Banjulinding Police Station where I gave a statement.”
Sillah then asked the court to admit that statement, which was marked as Exhibit DD5.
When asked if he knew of any other people involved besides the shooter, Jallow responded: “I didn’t see anyone else. I didn’t see a female shooter, either.”
“So, how do you feel that despite being an eyewitness, you were not called by the police to testify until now?” Sillah probed.
“I felt bad. These were my comrades. I once went to the Ministry of Justice and they showed me my statement. I was told I’d be testifying, but it never happened until now,” Jallow explained.
Adding further pressure, Sillah asked, “As an army expert, did you know the weapon used?”
“It wasn’t an AK-47. It was a pistol,” Jallow replied, confirming that the attacker was close enough to the PIU officers to struggle with them before shooting them at point-blank range.
The cross-examination drew criticism from the DPP, who in his own questioning sought to restore the credibility of the witness.
“You said the shooter was close to the officers. Why didn’t they manage to disarm him?” DPP Yusuf asked.
“There was a struggle. The second officer tried to disarm him before he was shot,” Jallow responded.
“Yet you say he’s a professional?” DPP Yusuf challenged.
“Yes, he was accurate and deliberate. Not reckless,” Jallow maintained.
Justice Jaiteh, visibly interested in the matter of the witness’s exact location, asked pointedly, “If you were so close to the scene and the officer was down, why didn’t you secure the officer’s weapon?”
“I was shocked. I didn’t think about that,” Jallow replied. “I chased the attacker but had to retreat.”
The defence team now plans to call its next witness, currently outside the jurisdiction, via video link after Justice Jaiteh granted the application.
The case resumes on October 6, 2025.
