Rape ac­cuser ex­on­er­ates Ma­gaya

Chronicle (Zimbabwe) - - National News - Tendai Ru­papa Harare Bureau

THE woman who ac­cused Prophet Wal­ter Ma­gaya of rap­ing her yes­ter­day came out in the open and ex­on­er­ated the man of the cloth say­ing that she was wor­ried the Act­ing Prose­cu­tor Gen­eral was pur­su­ing the mat­ter de­spite her con­fes­sion.

In a let­ter dated De­cem­ber 1 ad­dressed to the Act­ing PG Ray Goba ac­com­pa­nied by an af­fi­davit, the woman in­sisted that she was never raped.

The doc­u­ments were also copied to the Na­tional Direc­tor of Pub­lic Pros­e­cu­tion Mrs Florence Ziyambi, Direc­tor of Pub­lic Pros­e­cu­tions Mr Nel­son Mut­sonziwa and Chief Pub­lic Prose­cu­tor Mr Michael Mu­gabe.

The Com­mis­sioner Gen­eral of Po­lice, the Of­fi­cer Com­mand­ing Law and Or­der, the Clerk of Court, Harare Mag­is­trates Court and Ma­gaya’s lawyers, were also copied. The woman said she did not want the mat­ter pur­sued. “I have al­ready in­di­cated that I want to with­draw these al­le­ga­tions but the Act­ing PG is pur­su­ing the mat­ter not­with­stand­ing that I have with­drawn the mat­ter out of my own vo­li­tion with­out any un­due in­flu­ence or duress be­ing ex­erted on me.

“The rea­son for the with­drawal is clear and it is that I was never raped, the re­port in ques­tion was sim­ply a false re­port against the ac­cused per­son. I un­der­stand the reper­cus­sions re­lat­ing to this and I am not go­ing to come back again on the ba­sis of these false rape al­le­ga­tions,” read the af­fi­davit.

In her let­ter, the woman ex­pressed dis­plea­sure in the man­ner the State wants to pro­ceed adding that if the mat­ter was to pro­ceed to trial, it would not come out well.

“It seems as if you have not taken heed of my clar­ion call that I have with­drawn the rape com­plaint. I was in the mag­is­trates’ court yes­ter­day and I was sur­prised your rep­re­sen­ta­tive one Michael Mu­gabe in­sisted that a de­ci­sion had been taken to pro­ceed and pros­e­cute the rape case in ques­tion yet I have with­drawn.

“It is my un­der­stand­ing that as the com­plainant I am in a po­si­tion to in­di­cate my de­ci­sion re­lat­ing the mat­ter. There can­not pos­si­bly be a rape case where I as the com­plainant has said the com­plaint was false and I was never raped,” she said in her let­ter.

She added: “If the mat­ter pro­ceeds in the man­ner pro­posed by your of­fice that might not come out well given that I have al­ready with­drawn this mat­ter. Kindly note that I was never in­ter­fered with nei­ther am I be­ing un­duly in­flu­enced be­cause I am an in­de­pen­dent woman who has de­cided to tell the truth.

“……I am more than pre­pared to at­tend to your of­fice for an interview but I will cat­e­gor­i­cally state what I have al­ways said which is con­tained in the at­tached af­fi­davit that I have served at your high of­fice,” she wrote.

The woman re­cently filed her with­drawal af­fi­davit and urged the rel­e­vant au­thor­i­ties to re­spect her de­ci­sion.

“I do not wish to pro­ceed with the case at all and never in my en­tire time, ‘’ she said.

She said the threats she re­ceived from un­known ‘forces’ that wanted Ma­gaya jailed were not the main cause of her de­ci­sion.

“I want to cor­rect any mis­guided mis­con­cep­tion or mis­guided in­fer­ences that the re­ferred threats are the prime cause of the with­drawal. Far from it, this with­drawal is mo­ti­vated by my own free will and vo­li­tion with­out any un­due in­flu­ence hav­ing been brought to bear,” she said.

How­ever, on Wed­nes­day Mr Mu­gabe in­di­cated to the court that the pros­e­cu­tion in­tends to in­dict Ma­gaya for trial at the High Court.

Ad­vo­cate Tha­bani Mpofu who is rep­re­sent­ing Ma­gaya with in­struc­tions from Rubaya and Chatam­budza Le­gal prac­ti­tion­ers, said the State’s in­ten­tion was “tainted”.

He said the com­plainant had con­fessed to Mr Mu­gabe in his pres­ence that she was not raped, but that she had lied against Ma­gaya.

Adv Mpofu then chal­lenged the State’s in­ten­tion to in­dict.

The de­fence team then told the court that to but­tress their ar­gu­ment, they wanted to call the com­plainant to the wit­ness stand to con­fess be­fore the court.

“We would like to call the com­plainant to the wit­ness stand so that she can say be­fore this court what she said to the State in my pres­ence this morn­ing,” he said.

The State ob­jected to the ap­pli­ca­tion ar­gu­ing that it was un­prece­dented for the de­fence to use a State wit­ness.

The mag­is­trate Mr Vakayi Chik­wekwe ruled that de­spite the wishes of the com­plainant, the State could pro­ceed to trial since it is domi­nus litus in the mat­ter.

The lawyers then in­di­cated that they in­tended to ap­proach the Con­sti­tu­tional Court and they will file their writ­ten sub­mis­sions for the ap­pli­ca­tion for re­fer­ral to­day and the State will file their re­sponse on De­cem­ber 12.

The mat­ter will be back in court on De­cem­ber 19 when both par­ties are ex­pected to make oral sub­mis­sions to sup­port their writ­ten ones.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Zimbabwe

© PressReader. All rights reserved.