Three Children, One Locked Car And Too Many Unanswered Questions: What Really Happened In Tamale?

The deaths of three young children in Tamale have raised questions that go far beyond the discovery of their bodies. Before conclusions are reached, the police must establish one thing above everything else: exactly how three children ended up inside the locked boot of a vehicle and how they died.

Tamale is mourning.
But beyond the grief is a disturbing puzzle.

Three children Dauda Abdul Aziz, aged three; Saani Alsharaf, aged five; and Dauda Fadilan, aged seven are dead after their bodies were found inside the boot of a black Hyundai Tucson at Koblimahagu Zoo in the Tamale Metropolis.

According to the Northern Regional Police Command, the children reportedly left home at about 8:00 a.m. on Sunday, October 4, 2026, to attend Islamic classes. They did not return home.

A search followed.
Then, at approximately 5:00 a.m. on Monday, October 5, their bodies were discovered inside the boot of the Hyundai Tucson, registration number AS 1770-14.

And that is where the story becomes deeply troubling.

Because according to the police's preliminary inspection, the boot was locked.

The driver's door and the rear passenger door behind the driver's seat were reportedly open, while the other doors including the boot were locked.

The vehicle was also reportedly stuck in mud.

The owner, according to police, is a personnel of the Ghana Immigration Service. He reportedly told investigators that the vehicle had been stuck in the mud for about five days. He has since been arrested and taken to Accra to assist with investigations.

The Inspector-General of Police has meanwhile deployed homicide investigators, crime-scene experts and intelligence officers to assist the Northern Regional Police Command.

The vehicle has been secured for forensic examination, and an autopsy is expected to provide further information.

But the public deserves more than a list of facts.

The public deserves answers.
WHO WERE THESE THREE CHILDREN?
Dauda Abdul Aziz was three.
Saani Alsharaf was five.
Dauda Fadilan was seven.
At those ages, they were children who depended almost entirely on adults for their safety.

Police say they left home to attend Islamic classes.

But several questions remain unanswered publicly.

Were the three children siblings?
Did they have the same parents?
Who exactly were their fathers and mothers?

Were they attending the same Islamic school?

Who was their Islamic teacher?
What classes were they enrolled in?
Were they walking together?
Who was the last adult known to have seen them alive?

And, most importantly, where exactly were they last seen before they disappeared?

These questions are not accusations.
They are basic investigative questions.
Unfortunately, the publicly available police information has not yet provided all the answers.

WHAT WERE THE CHILDREN'S LAST KNOWN MOVEMENTS?

Police currently say the children left home at approximately 8:00 a.m. on Sunday for Islamic classes.

That establishes an important starting point.

But investigators must reconstruct everything that happened between 8:00 a.m. Sunday and 5:00 a.m. Monday.

That is approximately 21 hours.
Where were they during those hours?
Did they actually reach the Islamic class?

Did anyone see them there?
Did the teacher record their attendance?

Did they leave together?
Did they meet someone on the way?
Did they enter a vehicle voluntarily?
Were they persuaded, forced or somehow lured into the vehicle?

Did anybody see them near the Hyundai Tucson?

Were there CCTV cameras in the area?
Were there mobile-phone records, eyewitnesses, footprints, fingerprints, DNA, clothing fibres or other forensic evidence?

These are the questions that can transform this investigation from speculation into evidence.

THE LOCKED-BOOT QUESTION
This may be the most important issue in the entire investigation.

Police say the children's bodies were found in the boot.

Police also say the boot was locked when officers examined the vehicle.

So investigators must establish:
How did the children get into the boot?
A three-year-old, a five-year-old and a seven-year-old are not three adults capable of independently explaining what happened.

If the theory is that they entered the vehicle themselves, investigators must demonstrate how.

Could the children open the particular Hyundai Tucson without a key?

Could they access the passenger compartment?

Could they reach the boot-release mechanism?

Could the boot be opened from inside?
Was there a mechanical or electronic fault?

Could the vehicle have been unlocked at an earlier time?

Was the boot subsequently locked?
Was the vehicle's locking system functioning normally?

Was there any evidence that the doors had been opened or tampered with?

These questions should not be dismissed as speculation.

They are precisely the questions a forensic investigation should answer.

AND WHAT DOES “LOCKED” ACTUALLY MEAN?

There is another distinction investigators must make.

A vehicle can be described as “locked” when it is inspected after an incident.

But that does not necessarily establish that it was locked at the precise moment the children entered it.

Therefore, investigators need to determine the timeline of the locking.

Was the car locked before the children entered?

Was it unlocked at any point?
Who had access to the keys?
Were there spare keys?
Was the vehicle equipped with a functioning remote locking system?

Was there evidence of forced entry?
Were fingerprints found on the door handles?

Were fingerprints found around the boot?

Were the children's fingerprints found inside the vehicle?

Were there fingerprints belonging to other people?

Was DNA recovered?
Were there signs of struggle?
Were the children's clothes damaged?

Were there injuries?
Were there signs of restraint?
Were there signs that the children had attempted to escape?

These are not questions for social media.

They are questions for forensic investigators.

THE FIVE-DAY QUESTION
Then comes another extraordinary detail.

Police say the vehicle owner told investigators that the Hyundai Tucson had been stuck in mud for approximately five days.

That statement must now be independently verified.

If the vehicle had genuinely been stuck in that location for five days, investigators should establish:

Who saw it there?
Exactly where was it stuck?
When did it become stuck?
Who attempted to remove it?
Was anyone called to assist?
Was a mechanic contacted?
Did neighbours see the vehicle?
Were there photographs or videos showing the vehicle in that position before Sunday?

Was the vehicle actually stationary for five days, or had it been moved during that period?

This is where modern investigation becomes crucial.

Mobile-phone location data, CCTV footage, traffic cameras, photographs, social-media posts, witnesses and forensic examination could potentially help reconstruct the vehicle's movements.

WHERE WAS THE OWNER?
The owner has reportedly been arrested and taken to Accra to assist with investigations.

But the question is not simply whether he owns the vehicle.

Investigators must reconstruct his movements.

Where was he when the children disappeared?

Where was he on Sunday?
Who was with him?
When did he last see the vehicle?
When did he last enter it?
When did he last open the boot?
Who else had access to the vehicle?
Who possessed the keys?
Was anyone else using the vehicle?
Did he report the vehicle missing?
Did he know the children?
Had he ever interacted with them?
Did the children's families know him?

Had the children ever been seen around the vehicle?

Had they ever played inside the vehicle?

Did anyone in the community know of a relationship between the children and the vehicle owner?

These questions should be investigated without assuming guilt.

An arrest is not a conviction.
The vehicle owner's rights must be respected.

But the fact that he has been arrested also means investigators have a responsibility to scrutinise his account against independent evidence.

WHAT DOES THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE SAY?
This is another critical area where the public must be careful.

As of the latest police reports available, the cause of death has not been publicly established.

The bodies were taken for autopsy, and police have said the autopsy is expected to provide further information.

Therefore, it would be irresponsible to announce that the children died from suffocation.

It would equally be irresponsible to announce that they were murdered before being placed in the vehicle.

Both possibilities require evidence.
The autopsy should establish, among other things, whether there were:

- signs of asphyxia or oxygen deprivation;

- injuries consistent with blunt-force trauma;

- strangulation or suffocation;
- poisoning or toxic substances;
- drowning or another mechanism of death;

- evidence that death occurred before or after entry into the boot;

- injuries suggesting restraint or struggle;

- other pathological findings that could establish the sequence of events.

The central question is not merely “How did they die?”

It is:
“Did they die inside the boot, or were they already dead when they were placed there?”

That distinction could fundamentally change the direction of the investigation.

WHO FOUND THEM?
Another important question requires clarification.

Reports say community members were searching for the missing children and that their bodies were eventually discovered at about 5:00 a.m.

But the public needs a clear account of who first saw the children, what exactly that person observed, and why that person checked the vehicle.

Was it a family member?
A neighbour?
A search party?
A passer-by?
A security officer?
A community leader?
Who first raised the alarm?
Was the vehicle opened by the police?
Was it already accessible through one of the open doors?

Was the boot opened using a key?
Was it forced open?
Was a locksmith involved?
Were photographs taken before the vehicle was disturbed?

Who touched the vehicle before forensic officers arrived?

These details matter enormously.
Every person who came into contact with the vehicle before forensic examination potentially becomes an important witness.

THE COMMUNITY MUST ALSO BE HEARD
Investigators should not look only at the vehicle.

They should investigate the community around it.

Who lives near the location?
Who regularly uses the road?
Who saw the Hyundai Tucson?
Who knew the vehicle had been stuck there?

Who saw the children on Sunday?
Who heard anything unusual?
Who saw adults around the vehicle?
Who saw the children entering or approaching any vehicle?

Were there arguments, screams, cries or unusual activity?

Did anyone notice the children playing near the vehicle previously?

And if they had ever entered or played inside it before, who knew about that?

The answer could be critical.
THE POLICE HAVE A DIFFICULT JOB BUT THE QUESTIONS CANNOT BE SOFT

The Ghana Police Service has already demonstrated that it considers the matter serious by deploying homicide investigators, crime-scene experts and intelligence officers.

That is appropriate.
But the seriousness of the investigation must be reflected in the questions investigators ask.

The investigation cannot end with:
“They entered the vehicle.”
Investigators must establish how.
It cannot end with:
“The vehicle was locked.”
Investigators must establish when it was locked, by whom and with what mechanism.

It cannot end with:
“The owner said the vehicle had been stuck for five days.”

Investigators must establish whether independent evidence supports that statement.

It cannot end with:
“The children died in the vehicle.”

Investigators must establish the medical and forensic basis for that conclusion.

And it cannot end with:
“The owner was arrested.”
An arrest is only the beginning of an investigation.

QUESTIONS THAT GHANA SHOULD BE ASKING
If three children can somehow enter a vehicle that was allegedly locked, then Ghana deserves an explanation of the mechanism.

If they could not enter it themselves, then who opened it?

If they entered it voluntarily, who saw them enter?

If they were placed inside, who placed them there?

If they died from lack of oxygen, what does the autopsy show?

If they were already dead before entering the boot, what caused their deaths?

If the vehicle had been stuck for five days, where is the independent evidence confirming that timeline?

If the children knew the vehicle owner, what was the nature of that relationship?

If they did not know him, how did they come into contact with his vehicle?

If they had previously played inside the vehicle, who can confirm it?

If they had never been inside it, why were their bodies found there?

Who possessed the keys?
Were there spare keys?
Was the locking mechanism functional?
Were there fingerprints inside the boot?

Were there fingerprints belonging to the children?

Were there fingerprints belonging to the owner?

Were there fingerprints belonging to somebody else?

Were there DNA traces?
Were there injuries?
Were there signs of struggle?
Were there signs of restraint?
Was there any evidence that the children tried to escape?

Was the vehicle searched before the bodies were discovered?

And perhaps the biggest question:
What happened between 8:00 a.m. on Sunday, when these children reportedly left for Islamic classes, and 5:00 a.m. on Monday, when they were found dead?

That 21-hour window may contain the entire story.

THREE CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BECOME THREE UNSOLVED QUESTIONS

There is a danger in cases such as this.

Public outrage can run ahead of evidence.

Rumours can become facts.
Suspicions can become accusations.
And an innocent person can become guilty in the court of public opinion before investigators have completed their work.

That must not happen.
But the opposite danger is equally serious.

A complicated case can be reduced to a few official statements, while critical questions remain unanswered.

That must not happen either.
The families deserve the truth.
The children deserve the truth.
The owner deserves a fair investigation.

And the public deserves an investigation capable of explaining every important piece of evidence.

For now, the confirmed facts are stark: three children aged three, five and seven disappeared after reportedly leaving home for Islamic classes; their bodies were later found in the boot of a Hyundai Tucson; police say the boot was locked when they inspected the vehicle; the vehicle owner, a Ghana Immigration Service personnel, has been arrested to assist investigations; and the cause of death remains subject to forensic and autopsy findings.

Everything beyond those established facts must be tested.

Because in this case, the most important question is not simply who is responsible?

It is first:
WHAT EXACTLY HAPPENED TO THESE THREE CHILDREN?

And until that question is answered with evidence not rumours, assumptions or convenient explanations the people of Tamale have every reason to keep asking difficult questions.

By:
Patrick Belebang Yagsori
0240292413
patrickbelebang@gmail.com

   Comments0