Sunday, November 1, 2020

Murder verdict due next Thursday

Lobatse High Court judge, Maruping Dibotelo, is next Thursday expected to deliver judgment in a case in which South African Michael Molefe and Brandon Sampson are accused of killing Zimbabwean citizens, Hebert Ncube and Sam Hombarume, in Mogoditshane on December 24, 2000.

Lawyer Ookeditse Maphakwane, representing Molefe, submitted that his client be acquitted and discharged because the state failed to prove its case against him.

Maphakwane made the submission because, he said, the state’s case against his client was based on evidence made by a certain Goitseone Sekhumba, who ‘has proved to be a very unreliable person when giving evidence in Court.’
Sekhumba, said Maphakwane, disappeared during cross examination, adding that this was a clear sign that he was not a person to be trusted.

The lawyer said that Sekhumba had disappeared because he feared that his lies on the incident would be exposed under cross examination.
He charged that there was also evidence that Sekhumba is the one who brought the gun which is alleged to have been used in the murder of one of the deceased persons.

Besides that, Maphakwane said that his client had said that he had no intention to kill but only wanted to scare the deceased, adding that he was drunk during the incident.

Duma Boko, for Sampson, said that a forensic expert who gave evidence in the matter had admitted that he could not conclusively say the gun before the Court was the one which was used during the murder.

On the charges his client is facing, he said that his client had, on the day in question, gone to the place where the alleged murder took place for a foreign exchange deal which he submitted was legal.
He said that his client then got involved in a fight with the deceased and that it was during that fight that he grabbed a knife in the house and stabbed the deceased. This, he said, was a clear case of self defence which he submitted was allowed by law. Even the wound that led to the deceased’s death, he pointed out, was never described as grievous by the doctors.

Boko also submitted that it was not true that his client and Molefe had committed the offence under common purpose as submitted by the state saying that the mere fact that they knew each other does not mean that they acted under common purpose.
Sampson, he said, did not know about the gun Molefe was allegedly carrying and that he had never had any connection with the gun as he did not even reside with Molefe.

The prosecutor, Susan Mangori, on the other hand, submitted that the state had proved its case against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, adding that the murders were committed by the two accused persons whom she said acted in a very brutal manner against the deceased persons.
Mangori further submitted that even if it were true that the deceased persons had wronged the accused persons, their action of killing the deceased persons was not justified in any way. Mangori added that the blood of one of the deceased persons was also found on the clothes worn by Molefe.

RELATED STORIES

Read this week's paper

Is the Kebonang judgment opening a pandora’s box?

The High Court’s decision that reviewed and set aside the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision to institute criminal proceedings against the two...