|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Claim: A blurred photo posted by the Ghana Police Service allegedly shows Sibamay Zakaria, the primary suspect who physically assaulted a handcuffed pastor in a viral social media video.
Verdict: False! A side-by-side comparison by DUBAWA of frames from the viral video and the clearest available photographs of the individual shown in connection with the arrest found that the man in the police photograph is not the same person seen assaulting the pastor.
Full Text
A viral video circulating on social media shows an Islamic leader. Sibamay Zakaria, popularly known as Alhaji Papa Angola, with a group of individuals confronting and physically assaulting Apostle Daniel JY Adjei, who was handcuffed at the time.
The video triggered widespread public outrage after a man was seen placing his hand on the pastor’s face and physically striking him while others looked on.
The incident followed the pastor’s arrest over allegations that he had made insulting remarks about Prophet Mohammed.
Hours after the video began circulating, the Ghana Police Service announced the police were on a manhunt for the suspect who slapped the Apostle in the viral video.
SoonNot too long after, the police announced the arrest of the suspect in connection with the incident. The police statement included a full-length photograph of a man whose face had been blurred.
The photograph subsequently triggered questions online, with some social media users claiming that the individual shown by the police was not the same man seen physically assaulting the pastor.
DUBAWA decided to examine the claim by comparing the police photograph with images and video frames of the man seen carrying out the assault.
Verification
DUBAWA conducted a side-by-side visual comparison using frames from the viral video and the clearest available photographs of the individual shown in connection with the police arrest.
The comparison focused primarily on facial structure and other physical features that could reasonably be assessed across the images.
Facial features
The man seen physically assaulting the pastor has a broader, fuller facial structure and heavier jawline.
By contrast, the individual shown in the arrest-related photographs has a noticeably narrower facial structure and slimmer jawline.
These differences are visible across the available images and are not solely attributable to differences in clothing or camera angle.
Hair and headwear
The man seen in the video wears a tall, multicoloured patterned traditional cap.
The individual shown in the arrest photographs is bareheaded and has closely cropped hair with a visibly different hairline.
Although headwear can be changed, the differences in hairline and facial structure provide additional points of comparison. DUBAWA found various video interviews and photos of Sibamay Zakaria posted months ago, captured under different lighting and in different settings, for facial comparison.
Clothing
The man seen striking the pastor is wearing a white, flowing traditional outfit with prominent dark geometric embroidery across the chest.
The individual shown in the arrest-related photographs is wearing a cream or beige traditional outfit with a different design and cut.
Clothing alone cannot establish whether two images show the same person because an individual can change clothes. It is therefore treated only as supporting evidence alongside the observed facial differences.
DUBAWA treats this result as supplementary evidence rather than definitive biometric proof. Facial-comparison systems can be affected by image quality, lighting, pose, resolution and other factors. The score was therefore considered alongside the observable differences among the individuals.
An AI-generated image adds to the confusion
DUBAWA also examined separate images circulated on social media purporting to show Sibamay Zakaria’s face in handcuffs.
The post by Barnabas Nii Laryea carrying the image was labelled “AI” by Facebook. Two additional AI-image detection tools also flagged the image as highly likely to have been generated or manipulated using artificial intelligence.
These automated detection results do not, on their own, conclusively establish that an image has been generated or manipulated using AI. However, the Facebook AI label and the independent detector results raise significant questions about the image’s provenance and reliability.
Consequently, DUBAWA did not rely on the image as evidence for identifying the person arrested by the police.
Body-comparison test
DUBAWA also submitted reference images of the two individuals, a social media image of Sibamay Zakaria, and the blurred image posted by the police purporting to be Sibamay Zakaria, to a facial-comparison tool.
The tool returned a 21 per cent similarity score and classified the images as “Different People.”
Assessment
The two individuals display significant differences in facial structure, hairline, and other visible characteristics. The facial-comparison tool also returned a low similarity score and classified the images as depicting different people.
Separately, an image circulated online to support claims about the identity of the alleged suspect was labelled as AI-generated on Facebook and was independently flagged as highly likely to have been generated or manipulated by two AI-detection tools.
The image therefore cannot reliably be used to establish the identity of the arrested person.
DUBAWA contacted Superintendent Juliana Obeng, Accra Regional Head of Public Affairs of the Ghana Police Service, and DCOP Grace Akrofi, Director General of the Police Public Affairs Directorate, for clarification on whether the individual shown in the arrest photograph is the same person seen physically assaulting the pastor in the viral video. At the time of publication, neither officer had responded to DUBAWA’s request for comment.
Conclusion
The available evidence indicates that the individual shown in the Ghana Police Service’s blurred arrest photograph is not the same person seen physically assaulting the handcuffed pastor in the viral video.
The claim that the police photograph depicts the primary assailant is therefore false.
