|
|
|
|
| National |
| State accused of influencing trial,State accused of influencing trial |
|
by
Mc Donald Chapalapata,Mc Donald Chapalapata, 13 January 2004
-
16:36:06
|
Chief Nyambi of Machinga, sentenced to death for killing a person has appealed against the verdict arguing that the jury was influenced by members of the public who had some contact with them.
Chief Nyambi said in his grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal that presiding High Court Judge Justice John Katsala misdirected the jury in that he told them to disregard political issues in the case.
Nyambi 39, whose real name is Yasin Lingoma together with George Allan 19, and Rashid Willo 14 are accused of killing Patrick Ingolo who was alleged to have stolen maize from Nyambi’s wife garden on February 23 2002 in Machinga.
“The judge misdirected the jury in that he told them to discuss the case in the way they discuss cases in their villages,” reads one ground of appeal.
One of the jurors Eunice Bengo who was the only juror who voted against the death penalty out of the 12, alleges in the her affidavit in support of Nyambi’s appeal that the Jury’s foreman Cosmas Pitiloza led the other jurors to come up with a standby verdict on the second day of the trial.
“Our foreman Cosmas Pitiloza had engaged himself in spying right from the first day of the trial and was ready to expose out whoever would have a dissenting view against the state’s opinion in any way,” reads part of Bengo’s affidavit.
Bengo also said having formed a group opinion before the conclusion of the trial, it was absolutely difficult to gather some fair facts for or against any of the parties to the proceedings.
Nyambi also said in his grounds of appeal that Justice Katsala exposed the jury to possible manipulation by refusing to sit on Saturday September 20, 2003 which the judge called the ‘Lord’s Day’.
“Yet all the lawyers handling the case had no problems to sit on their ‘Lord’s Day’ which was Sunday September 21, 2003,” reads the grounds of appeal.
Nyambi’s lawyer Arthur Makhalira confirmed on Tuesday of appealing against the verdict saying they are waiting for a day for the hearing of the appeal. ,
Chief Nyambi of Machinga, sentenced to death for killing a person has appealed against the verdict arguing that the jury was influenced by members of the public who had some contact with them.
Chief Nyambi said in his grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal that presiding High Court Judge Justice John Katsala misdirected the jury in that he told them to disregard political issues in the case.
Nyambi 39, whose real name is Yasin Lingoma together with George Allan 19, and Rashid Willo 14 are accused of killing Patrick Ingolo who was alleged to have stolen maize from Nyambi’s wife garden on February 23 2002 in Machinga.
“The judge misdirected the jury in that he told them to discuss the case in the way they discuss cases in their villages,” reads one ground of appeal.
One of the jurors Eunice Bengo who was the only juror who voted against the death penalty out of the 12, alleges in the her affidavit in support of Nyambi’s appeal that the Jury’s foreman Cosmas Pitiloza led the other jurors to come up with a standby verdict on the second day of the trial.
“Our foreman Cosmas Pitiloza had engaged himself in spying right from the first day of the trial and was ready to expose out whoever would have a dissenting view against the state’s opinion in any way,” reads part of Bengo’s affidavit.
Bengo also said having formed a group opinion before the conclusion of the trial, it was absolutely difficult to gather some fair facts for or against any of the parties to the proceedings.
Nyambi also said in his grounds of appeal that Justice Katsala exposed the jury to possible manipulation by refusing to sit on Saturday September 20, 2003 which the judge called the ‘Lord’s Day’.
“Yet all the lawyers handling the case had no problems to sit on their ‘Lord’s Day’ which was Sunday September 21, 2003,” reads the grounds of appeal.
Nyambi’s lawyer Arthur Makhalira confirmed on Tuesday of appealing against the verdict saying they are waiting for a day for the hearing of the appeal. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
