Prison sex scandal judgement nears
Inmate allegedly killed in a fit of jealousy
The State insists it has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt implicating three inmates it alleges killed a fellow prisoner in what became to be known as the prison sex scandal.
State Advocate Ethel Ndlovu in her arguments for judgment told the court this week that the deceased, Eddy /Gomxob, was stabbed to death in Cell 4 of Unit 7 at the Windhoek Correctional Facility on 18 January 2012 – apparently in a fit of jealousy.
She emphasised in her submission that inmates Herman Rukero and Benedictus Afrikaner fatally stabbed /Gomxob. She added that the third accused, Maleachi Seibeb, was also in the bathroom whilst the attack on the deceased was going on.
Ndlovu further argued that there is evidence to prove that all three accused were acting in common purpose to kill /Gomxob and that the killing was premeditated considering the fact that /Gomxob was not a Cell 4 detainee.
“The manner in which the deceased ended up in Cell 4 when he should have been in Cell 1 shows that there was a plan for him to be in Cell 4,” she reasoned.
Ndlovu further argued that Afrikaner was also in Cell 4 on that particular day where he was not detained.
According to her, State witnesses, especially Willem Peter, had testified that Afrikaner and Seibeb had a sexual relationship with Rukero.
Afrikaner''s defence lawyer Milton Engelbrecht argued that his client did not actively associate himself or assist his co-accused in the commission of the crime. “My client lacks the necessary intention and therefore cannot be convicted of the crime,” Engelbrecht argued.
According to him, the mere fact that Seibeb happened to be at the scene of the crime and was a passive spectator of the events unfolding in the bathroom, cannot serve as a basis of holding him liable for the crime committed. He further argued that the prison authorities had failed in their duty to assist Afrikaner with his request to be transferred from Unit 7. “The Ombudsman reported about abuse in the country''s prisons, but nothing seems to have been done. The court must not only protect the inmates, but the public at large by ordering that the Ombudsman''s report is adhered to,” he said. Seibeb''s lawyer Mbanga Siyomuinji argued that there were no traces of blood found on the murder weapon.
“If the exhibits were murder weapons there should have been traces of blood. Scientific examination did not find any,” he argued.
He further maintained that the witnesses who testified that they saw Seibeb stepping on the head of the deceased couldn''t tell the court how many times his client did that.
Judge Dinnah Usiku postponed the matter for judgment to 7 February 2017.
FRED GOEIEMAN
State Advocate Ethel Ndlovu in her arguments for judgment told the court this week that the deceased, Eddy /Gomxob, was stabbed to death in Cell 4 of Unit 7 at the Windhoek Correctional Facility on 18 January 2012 – apparently in a fit of jealousy.
She emphasised in her submission that inmates Herman Rukero and Benedictus Afrikaner fatally stabbed /Gomxob. She added that the third accused, Maleachi Seibeb, was also in the bathroom whilst the attack on the deceased was going on.
Ndlovu further argued that there is evidence to prove that all three accused were acting in common purpose to kill /Gomxob and that the killing was premeditated considering the fact that /Gomxob was not a Cell 4 detainee.
“The manner in which the deceased ended up in Cell 4 when he should have been in Cell 1 shows that there was a plan for him to be in Cell 4,” she reasoned.
Ndlovu further argued that Afrikaner was also in Cell 4 on that particular day where he was not detained.
According to her, State witnesses, especially Willem Peter, had testified that Afrikaner and Seibeb had a sexual relationship with Rukero.
Afrikaner''s defence lawyer Milton Engelbrecht argued that his client did not actively associate himself or assist his co-accused in the commission of the crime. “My client lacks the necessary intention and therefore cannot be convicted of the crime,” Engelbrecht argued.
According to him, the mere fact that Seibeb happened to be at the scene of the crime and was a passive spectator of the events unfolding in the bathroom, cannot serve as a basis of holding him liable for the crime committed. He further argued that the prison authorities had failed in their duty to assist Afrikaner with his request to be transferred from Unit 7. “The Ombudsman reported about abuse in the country''s prisons, but nothing seems to have been done. The court must not only protect the inmates, but the public at large by ordering that the Ombudsman''s report is adhered to,” he said. Seibeb''s lawyer Mbanga Siyomuinji argued that there were no traces of blood found on the murder weapon.
“If the exhibits were murder weapons there should have been traces of blood. Scientific examination did not find any,” he argued.
He further maintained that the witnesses who testified that they saw Seibeb stepping on the head of the deceased couldn''t tell the court how many times his client did that.
Judge Dinnah Usiku postponed the matter for judgment to 7 February 2017.
FRED GOEIEMAN
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article