Through their lawyers, Mr Alec Muchadehama and Mr Jeremiah
Bamu, the duo claimed the video was aired on ZBCTv on September 9, 2020 and
wanted it to be part of their application.
Mamombe and Chimbiri claimed the video was played on the
national broadcaster with the intention to create the impression that they
faked their abduction in May of the same year.
The two wanted their matter, in which they are accused of
faking their abduction, to be referred to the ConCourt arguing that several of
their rights were violated by their arrest.
In their application, they claimed there was incessant and
adverse media publicity aimed at swaying the court to convict them, and the
video from ZBC would show the negative publicity they were subjected to.
The State objected to the production of the video because
of want of procedure and doubts regarding the authenticity of the video.
It said it will not allow the production of the video
unless Mamombe and Chimbiri take the person who produced it to testify in court
and be subjected to cross-examination.
“We are strongly opposed to the tendering of the video
whose creator is unknown.
“The State is opposed to its production for want of
procedure,” said Mr Michael Reza, who appeared for the State.
Mr Reza argued that documents had to be certified to
qualify for their production in court records and questioned how a flash disc
(memory stick), which the opposition party members wanted to tender, could be
certified.
“He brought a flash disc and say it is a certified copy.
How can this be certified? Everyone knows processes of certification.
“How does this flash (disc) purportedly containing evidence
of abduction be termed trade or business record.”
“He is inviting a procedure which is alien to this
jurisdiction,” he said.
Mr Reza rubbished Mamombe and Chimbiri’s assertions that
their rights were violated by “incessant and adverse” publicity aimed at
swaying the court into convicting them saying the court deals with law not
public opinion.
“In the magistracy, this is the highest court (Chief
Magistrate) and I do not believe that the court would say because of what was
aired on ZTV, I find you guilty.
“It deals with proper evidence adduced in the court, not
statements by friends to each other. It is a court of record. The State is very
strongly opposed to this piece of irrelevant and inadmissible content
contaminating the court record. On all fronts, this application ought to fail,”
he said.
Mr Tafara Chirambira, who appeared together with Mr Reza,
buttressed the latter’s submissions saying the State was not agreeing with the
video’s authenticity.
He said authenticity was one of the requirements before a
document was admitted into the court’s record.
“There is procedural irregularities that my colleagues are
asking the court to partake.
“We are not agreeing on authenticity. We do not know of the
flash and its contents,” he said.
Mr Muchadehama said the production of the video related to
the application and one of the reliefs sought was that accused were not likely
to receive a fair trial because there had been incessant and adverse publicity
“to influence the outcome of these proceedings”.
“The reason for the production of the video is to show that
it was aired on ZTV. The video was aired on September 9, 2020,” he said.
Mr Muchadehama said the video was authentic since it was
downloaded from the national broadcaster and by its corporate legal secretary.
“ZBC downloaded the video and put it on flash, it then
qualifies to be produced,” he said.
Chief Magistrate Mrs Faith Mushure is expected to decide on
whether the flash disc will be admitted into the record or not on February 16.
Herald
0 comments:
Post a Comment