Former Narcotics Officer Sentenced to 30 Years for Armed Robbery, Impersonation, and Conspiracy

The High Court sentenced Yerro Saidy, a former narcotics officer, to 30 years’ imprisonment following his conviction on charges of conspiracy to commit a felony, robbery with violence, and impersonation of a public officer. The judgment was delivered by Justice S.K. Jobarteh on Friday, May 30, 2025.

Saidy was initially arraigned on December 11, 2023, facing three serious criminal charges related to an armed robbery that occurred on July 27, 2023, in Kerr Sering. The prosecution alleged that Saidy conspired with two individuals currently at large, Kaw Jallow and Pape Sanyang, to rob Ebrima Sillah, a Bureau de Change operator.

According to the prosecution, Saidy, together with the co-accused, forcibly seized Sillah’s bag containing D600,000 while brandishing a firearm. Following the robbery, Saidy purportedly impersonated a police officer at the scene, directing that the apprehended suspect be handed over to him under the pretense of escorting him to Senegambia Police Station.

The prosecution presented eleven witnesses and seven exhibits, including a black metal pistol with six live rounds, mobile phones recovered at the scene, call logs linking the accused to the co-conspirators, and ballistic and forensic evidence. Eyewitnesses recounted how Sillah was attacked in broad daylight, the suspect wielding a firearm during a violent struggle, and Saidy’s subsequent suspicious intervention.

Investigations revealed that the phone found at the crime scene had communications with Saidy’s registered number and those of his alleged accomplices. A ballistic expert confirmed that the recovered weapon was functional and capable of lethal use. Further testimony established Saidy’s association with the other suspects.

Notably, Saidy was interdicted from the police force at the time of the incident and was no longer an active officer.

In his defense, Saidy testified that he was acting on personal errands and that his involvement at the robbery scene was a genuine attempt to prevent excessive violence. He denied the charges, alleging a personal vendetta with one of the investigating officers and asserting that incriminating evidence had been planted or misinterpreted.

The court carefully considered both prosecution and defense arguments, including detailed briefs filed by both parties.

Justice Jobarteh found the prosecution’s evidence “cogent, credible, and compelling.” The judge noted inconsistencies in Saidy’s testimony, particularly his failure to report key evidence and suspicious behavior surrounding the escape of the suspect. The court concluded that Saidy was not a bystander, but actively engaged in the criminal enterprise.

While there was insufficient direct evidence to convict Saidy’s alleged co-conspirators, the court held that Saidy conspired to commit the robbery and was a principal offender in the violent theft. The impersonation charge was upheld on grounds that Saidy’s claim to be a narcotics officer did not justify his false representation as a police officer at the scene, which facilitated the suspect’s escape.

In mitigation, Saidy’s counsel highlighted his medical conditions, status as a first-time offender, role as the primary provider for his family, and prolonged pre-trial detention.

However, Justice Jobarteh underscored the rising tide of armed robberies and violent crimes, emphasizing the need for a sentence that would serve both as deterrence and protection for the public. Balancing justice with mercy, the judge invoked relevant statutory provisions to impose a cumulative sentence of 30 years: 4 years for conspiracy, 23 years for robbery with violence, and 3 years for impersonating a public officer. The sentence is to run consecutively, effective from Saidy’s initial remand date in 2023.

The court ordered that Saidy’s personal belongings seized during the investigation be returned and mandated that the Director General of Mile 2 Prisons ensure the convict receives appropriate medical care. Saidy was reminded of his right to appeal the verdict.