High Court Sentences 64-Year-Old Man to Life Imprisonment for Rape of Minor

A 64-year-old man was sentenced to life in prison on Monday for the rape of a six-year-old girl, in a case that underscored the judiciary’s uncompromising stance on crimes against minors.

Justice Ebrima Jaiteh of the High Court in Banjul delivered the mandatory sentence to Momodou Yerro Baldeh, finding him guilty of one count of rape under Section 3(1)(a) of the Sexual Offences Act 2013. The offense, because the victim was under 13, carries a mandatory life sentence under Section 4(1)(a)(iii) of the act.

According to the prosecution, the assault occurred on Oct. 10, 2023, at London Corner, a neighborhood in the Serrekunda area. Prosecutors said Mr. Baldeh lured the child into his room with the promise of five dalasi (about 7 U.S. cents) before committing the sexual act.

The trial, which began in December 2023 after Mr. Baldeh pleaded not guilty, heard testimony from six prosecution witnesses. Central to the case was the testimony of the victim, now seven years old, who recounted being pulled into the room after being sent on an errand. Her grandmother testified that she discovered bloodstains on the child’s underwear the following morning.

Medical evidence presented by Dr. Ismaila Touray confirmed signs of severe blunt mechanical trauma, including localized redness and a partial disruption of the hymenal ring, which were consistent with the allegations. A ten-year-old sister of the victim also testified, stating she saw the accused pull her sister into his room and lock the door.

In his defense, Mr. Baldeh, through his lawyer A. Jarju, claimed the allegations were fabricated. He argued that the victim’s grandmother had coached the children to testify against him following a dispute over rent and his rejection of what he described as her sexual advances. He maintained his innocence, portraying himself as a pious man of good character—a claim supported by two defense witnesses who described him as a hardworking and devout Muslim.

Mr. Jarju also highlighted inconsistencies in the grandmother’s testimony regarding the time she discovered the bloodstains, and argued the medical evidence was scientifically insufficient to prove rape.

In a detailed judgment, Justice Jaiteh dismissed the defense’s arguments. He noted the consistency and sincerity of the young victim’s testimony, citing the legal precedent in R v. W (1998), which holds that minor discrepancies in a child’s testimony do not render their core narrative unreliable.

Referencing the landmark case of Woolmington v DPP [1935], Justice Jaiteh affirmed that the prosecution carries the unshifting burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt—a burden he ruled had been met. He also noted that Section 7 of the Sexual Offences Act removes the requirement for courts to treat sexual offense testimony with special caution, aligning Gambian law with international best practices.

The judge found the defense evidence “manifestly insufficient,” stating that character testimony cannot substitute for a factual rebuttal of the charges. He noted that the defense witnesses could not account for Mr. Baldeh’s whereabouts at the time of the crime.

In sentencing, Justice Jaiteh rejected an impassioned plea for leniency from Mr. Jarju, who cited his client’s age, status as a first-time offender, and role as the father of nine children who depend on him. Justice Jaiteh held that such factors carry “little or no mitigating weight” in cases involving the violation of a child.

“This sentence is imposed not only to punish the offender, now in the twilight of life, but also to deter others, uphold the rule of law, and protect the most vulnerable members of society,” Justice Jaiteh said in his ruling. “Justice for children must be firm, uncompromising, and swift.”

He reminded both parties of their right to appeal the judgment, conviction, or sentence within 30 days.

In a broader call to the public, Justice Jaiteh urged heightened vigilance and education on personal safety to safeguard children from similar abuse, emphasizing that the sentence sends an unequivocal message that child exploitation will attract the sternest punishment available under the law.