State vs. Sanna Manjang: Investigator Testifies on Alleged Kanilai Detention Site and Murders

The murder trial of the State against Sanna Manjang resumed before Justice Sidi K. Jobarteh at the High Court, where a police investigator described an alleged detention site in Kanilai and his role in the investigation into the deaths of Kajali Jammeh, Bai Dem, and Samba Wurry.

The prosecution team, led by Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions M. Dugan alongside F. Drammeh and A. Badjie, called Samba J. Sowe, an investigator attached to the Kairaba Police Station. Mr. Manjang is represented by defense counsel S.K. Jobe.

Taking the stand, Officer Sowe said he joined an investigative panel in November 2025 at the instruction of a senior officer, D.S. Demba. The panel, he testified, was tasked with probing allegations that the three men had been killed by Mr. Manjang.

On Nov. 17, 2025, Officer Sowe said he was part of a team that visited what investigators believed to be the crime scene in Kanilai. He told the court that they were led to a garden area by a witness, Essa Keita, who identified a nearby building as a detention center and alleged that the killings had occurred there.

The structure, Officer Sowe said, consisted of two rooms and a parlor. He testified that Mr. Keita pointed out a water tap near the building and indicated that it had been moved from its original position since the time of the alleged crimes. Crime scene officers photographed the site, he added.

Officer Sowe said his specific assignment on the panel was to obtain cautionary and voluntary statements from the accused. On Nov. 8, 2025, he visited Mr. Manjang at Mile 2 Central Prison for that purpose.

According to his testimony, an independent witness was present, and the standard caution was read. Mr. Manjang, however, declined to give a statement or sign any document without his lawyer present. Officer Sowe said that although the accused refused to sign, his personal details and the particulars of the murder allegations were recorded on the cautionary form.

Shown the documents in court, Officer Sowe identified them by his name, rank, and signature. The prosecution moved to tender the statements into evidence. The defense raised no objection, and Justice Jobarteh admitted the documents.

Under cross-examination, Mr. Jobe pressed Officer Sowe on the scope and depth of his investigation.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Is it true that all you said in this court isn’t true?

Samba J. Sowe: All I said is true.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: So, all you said to the court is the only thing you know about the case, and anything that you didn’t say didn’t happen?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: So, you didn’t go with the accused to Kanilai, but you didn’t tell that to the court?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes, we didn’t go with him.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: And you never invited him?

Samba J. Sowe: No.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Why didn’t you invite him?

Samba J. Sowe: I may not be the one to do so as I’m a junior.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Who was the leader of the investigation?

Samba J. Sowe: There was a commissioner.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Please tell me the names of the investigators.

Samba J. Sowe: It constitutes the Gambia Police Force, two directors of the SIS, and the Armed Forces: DSP Jally M.I. Senghore, DPS…

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Did you know them by their names?

Samba J. Sowe: No, I know them by their rank.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: And throughout the investigation, you didn’t ask them their names?

Samba J. Sowe: No, I didn’t.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: All of you went to Kanilai?

Samba J. Sowe: No, not all of us.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Who went to Kanilai?

Samba J. Sowe: Only me, Jally M.I. Senghore, DPS…

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Do you know the total number of investigators?

Samba J. Sowe: I don’t know the number.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Is it the first time you visited Kanilai?

Samba J. Sowe: I’m a native of Foni and I have been visiting Kanilai.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Are you aware that the place the president and his support staff—including the officers—occupied is called Warne?

Samba J. Sowe: I don’t know.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: I’m putting it to you that there is no detention centre called Warne in Kanilai.

Samba J. Sowe: The witness who led us told us the place is called Warne.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: I’m putting it to you that the witness is lying.

Samba J. Sowe: You can tell him that when he appears before the court.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Did you find any occupants in that alleged detention centre?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes, we found a soldier occupying that place.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Are you aware that a guard room isn’t a detention centre?

Samba J. Sowe: I’m not aware.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: And it’s equally correct that the guards you met at the guard post, you didn’t speak to them?

Samba J. Sowe: No, I didn’t speak to them, but my supervisor did.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Did you hear what your supervisor was talking to them about?

Samba J. Sowe: No.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: I’m putting it to you that the guard post was never used as a detention centre.

Samba J. Sowe: It was used as detention.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: You believe that it was a detention centre because of the information you obtained from Essa Keita?

Samba J. Sowe: No, but only he, but another soldier said the same.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: But you didn’t talk to anyone apart from Essa Keita in Kanilai?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes, but my team did.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: I’m putting it to you that the place you visited has always been a guard post, not a detention centre.

Samba J. Sowe: It used to be a detention centre.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: I’m putting it to you that you didn’t speak to any other witness in Kanilai.

Samba J. Sowe: Yes.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: And your supervisor also didn’t speak to any other witness in Kanilai.

Samba J. Sowe: I may not know, but they can speak on that.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Did you verify the information given to you by Essa Keita?

Samba J. Sowe: No.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Are you aware of everything that transpired during the investigation?

Samba J. Sowe: This is an investigation panel, and I may not be aware of everything, but I’m aware of my responsibility.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Is there a division of labour?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes. The division of labour was that I was tasked to obtain a statement, while someone was tasked to take pictures.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: How did you know about the shifting of the tap?

Samba J. Sowe: We were told.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: I’m putting it to you that you didn’t ask anyone about the shifting of the tap apart from Essa Keita.

Samba J. Sowe: I may not, but my colleague asked, and I didn’t know who

Counsel S.K. Jobe: During your visit to Kanilai, did you hear the word AAG?

Samba J. Sowe: No.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: During the entire investigation, you only visited Kanilai?

Samba J. Sowe: I also visited Mile 2.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Is that the only two places?

Samba J. Sowe: I only visited the two places.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: And the investigators also visited only those two places?

Samba J. Sowe: I only know where I visited.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Is it correct that you have never seen Kajali Jammeh in your entire life—no ID card of his, birth certificate, family members, dead body, or grave?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes, I have not seen all you have mentioned about Kajali Jammeh.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: It is the same as Samba Wurry. You didn’t see him in your life, his identification card like an ID card, birth certificate or anywhere he came from, nor any of his family members? Likewise, you have never seen his dead body or his grave.

Samba J. Sowe: Yes.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: And before this case, you have never met the accused person?

Samba J. Sowe: I have seen the accused.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: After the completion of the investigation, did you prepare a report?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Where is the report?

Samba J. Sowe: With Jally M.I. Senghore.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Did you see him sign it?

Samba J. Sowe: Yes.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: Did you sign it?

Samba J. Sowe: No.

Counsel S.K. Jobe: So, apart from Jally M.I. Senghore, did anyone sign the report?

Samba J. Sowe: I saw only Jally M.I. Senghore’s signature.

Counsel S K. Jobe: That’s all for the witness.

After the witness was excused, Deputy D.P.P. Dugan informed the court that the state intended to file an additional witness. Mr. Jobe objected, characterizing the move as “piecemeal prosecution” and arguing that the state should present all intended evidence at once.

Mr. Dugan responded that the need for the additional witness arose from issues raised during cross-examination and reiterated that the prosecution bears the burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Justice Jobarteh urged the prosecution to take the necessary procedural steps and ensure that the defense is served with the details of any additional witnesses.

The case was adjourned to March 9, 2026, for continuation of the trial.