READ MORE ON WWW.ZEDGOSSIP.NET and email zedgossip@gmail.com to place an ad.
REGISTER WITH PREMIERBET HERE JOIN PREMIERBET HERE AND CHECK THE LATEST BET ODDS HERE
Prosecution Blunders Worries Court
By Dickson Jere
Tina Muyuni was found dead in Mazabuka in May 2020. Her lifeless body was picked up by police who immediately launched an investigation into her murder. A month later, her phone was found with two people after her SIM card was inserted in one of the phones which triggered an alarm. The two suspects were arrested and charged with murder.
During trial, two witnesses were called who informed Court that the accused when he was taken to the scene of crime, confessed and demonstrated how he killed Tina Muyuni. But then, when he was put on his Defence, he told the Court that he picked the phone of Tina Muyuni on the road near the market.
Get your ZMW 200 Deposit bonus + 10 Free Spins – only at Bongobongo Zambia
The High Court acquitted the second accused – a juvenile – but convicted the older person on the ground that he confessed and that he was found in possession of the phone of the deceased. Nothing more! It was all circumstantial.
Unhappy with the conviction,he appealed to the Court of Appeal arguing that he never confessed freely and that he merely picked the phone on the road.
A penal of three Judges heard the appeal and made serious observations of how poor cases are being prosecuted in Zambia.
“We wish to guide that, a good prosecutor must be familiar with his or her case before appearing in court to prosecute. He or she must be familiar with the type of evidence they want to present before court in order to secure a conviction,” the Judges observed.
The Judges then advised that confessions can only be tendered in Court by the police or someone in authority and not mere witnesses who witnessed the confessions. That there is a procedure to be followed when administering confessions in evidence.
“We found it necessary to give this guidance on account of cases which have come before us where, what appears to be haphazard, accidental, blind or prosecution by chance has become the order of the day. A laissez-faire kind of prosecution,” the Court observed with very strong words.
On the issue of the accused being found with the phone of the deceased, the Court observed that he gave an explanation that he picked it on the road a month after the murder. The Judges further observed that the explanation made sense in the absence of conflicting evidence. The prosecution never rebutted that explanation and therefore the accused should have been given a benefit of doubt.
“We agree that a period of one month could have been enough for the phone to have exchanged hands,” the Judges observed, adding that circumstantial evidence in this case was not enough to convict someone.
“We set aside the conviction and the death sentence and set the appellant at liberty forthwith,” the Court ordered.
Case citation – Michelo Siangumba v The People (Appeal No. 180/2023) and Judgement rendered on the 30th August, 2023.
This is a very important case for the investigators and prosecutors to make sure that evidence is well structured and coordinated before presenting it to Court. They need to make sure that they have watertight cases for them to secure convictions in Court.
