Delivering his
judgment on October 23, 2025 Kezi magistrate, Busani Sibanda said the
prosecution’s case was riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions and poor
investigation, making it impossible for the court to convict the accused
persons.
“The State
failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused are guilty. The
accused are given the benefit of doubt and are acquitted,” Magistrate Sibanda
ruled.
The three
police officers were facing charges of assaulting 12 learners, allegedly using
open hands, switches and cables during a school awareness campaign in May this
year.
The alleged
assault reportedly caused injuries to the pupils.However, the court found the
evidence presented by the State to be unreliable, contradictory and
insufficient to link the accused directly to the alleged assaults.
Magistrate
Sibanda criticised the quality of the investigation, saying crucial exhibits
such as the alleged switches used in the assault were not brought to court
including the videos of the police officer committing the assault .
“I must state
the case was poorly investigated. If the switches existed, they needed to be
brought to court. If there were videos of the accused persons committing that
offence, they needed to be brought to court,” he said.
“As a result,
the inescapable conclusion is that the State failed to prove a case beyond
reasonable doubt that the accused persons committed this offence. The State
itself admitted that it did not manage to prove the guilt of the accused
persons.”
The magistrate
said the testimonies of the 17 State witnesses were inconsistent and lacked
credibility. Some witnesses claimed the children were assaulted, while others
said the pupils merely cried out of fear or embarrassment after being named and
shamed by their peers.
“Given the
inconsistencies in the evidence of those who were directly at the scene, the
court cannot help but conclude that they were economical with the truth. Their
evidence was tailored to protect their interests rather than bear the truth,”
Sibanda said.
“I must state
that there is scarcity of evidence in this case. The testimony of the State
witnesses is, in my view, inadequate proof of the guilt of the accused.”
He added that
the contradictions between the State’s outline and the witnesses’ testimonies
were fundamental and could not be ignored.
“There are
questions which have remained unanswered by the State and its witnesses, which
make one conclude that it cannot be safely said the State’s evidence is beyond
reproach. The general law is that where there is doubt, the doubt must be
resolved in a manner that benefits the accused.”
The court also
referenced earlier case law to highlight that the inconsistencies in the
witness accounts made it impossible to reach a conviction.
“There can be
no three different truths about one event,” Sibanda said, citing State vs Ncube
(HB 55/18). “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (False in one thing is false in
everything).”The magistrate added that some witnesses gave conflicting reasons
for why the children cried.
“We have been
told the reasons why the children cried. Some say it was because they were
beaten, some say it was because they were named, and some say the children
cried because they are afraid of the police. Some of the State witnesses say
the children were never assaulted, and this, in my view, is materially
different.”
Out of the 17
witnesses, including a seven-year-old boy, several contradicted themselves
during testimony and cross-examination.
The boy
initially told the court that he was assaulted by one of the officers who
allegedly lifted him by the ears and slapped him, but later changed his
statement under cross-examination, admitting that no one had assaulted him and
that he had been instructed by his aunt to tell the police otherwise.
As to how the
incident unfolded, according to the State, the three police officers were
invited by Mahetshe Primary School authorities to conduct an awareness campaign
on theft, drug abuse, teenage pregnancies, bullying and student love affairs.
The officers
allegedly grouped pupils according to the offences they were accused of
committing and then started assaulting them, a claim the officers denied.
The accused
admitted they addressed the learners and that some pupils began naming alleged
offenders during the session. The named children reportedly cried, prompting
nearby villagers to rush to the school after hearing the commotion.
The parents,
who were attending a meeting about 80 to 90 metres from the schoolyard,
allegedly confronted and insulted the police officers, accusing them of
speaking in Shona and reopening wounds of the Gukurahundi atrocities.
During the
trial, the defence argued that the children’s tears were due to embarrassment
and fear, not assault, a version that the magistrate said several witnesses,
including the complainants themselves, later confirmed in court.In his ruling,
Magistrate Sibanda said although there might be suspicion that the accused
could have been involved, the law does not allow convictions based on
suspicion.
“The court
agrees there is suspicion that the culprits may as well have been the accused
persons, but the law does not allow me to convict based on suspicion. There
must be proof beyond reasonable doubt,” he said.
He also said
there is a need for professionalism and fairness in future prosecutions.
“Prosecutions
should be undertaken without fear, favour, or bias because there is sufficient,
reliable evidence placed before the court. Decisions to withdraw or decline to
prosecute, hard and unpopular as they may be, should be made. The court should
not be used as a decision maker in unmeritorious prosecutions in which an
acquittal is a foregone conclusion.”
Magistrate
Sibanda concluded that the inconsistencies, lack of physical evidence and
unreliable witness testimony rendered the State’s case untenable.
“This is a
borderline case. It could have gone either way, but justice demands that where
there is doubt, the doubt must be resolved in favour of the accused,” he said.
CITE
0 comments:
Post a Comment