Court rules on illegal evidence

According to a report in The Mercury, the court unanimously ruled that incriminating evidence used in the 2003 trial of former Clicks manager Richard Molimi was inadmissible and the remaining evidence was not enough to justify his being found guilty. Molimi was charged, along with two others, with two counts of murder, attempted murder, kidnapping and illegal possession of arms and ammunition relating to a robbery during a routine cash collection by Fidelity guards at the Clicks store at the centre in 2000. In yesterday’s judgment Judge Bess Nkabinde found that the trial court had erred in admitting the statements of Molimi’s co-accused, saying one was a confession – which was outlawed by the Criminal Procedure Act – and the other a hearsay admission by an accused who played no active role in the robbery and was admitted into evidence only at the end of the case, after Molimi had testified. The court acknowledged the unfortunate circumstances of this case, whereby an accused is strongly suspected of having committed the offences is acquitted. It emphasised, however, that in spite of the strong suspicion and tragedy of this case (being the loss of innocent lives), the fundamental importance of the rule of law, the protection of an accused’s constitutional rights, and the necessity of fair trial proceedings in the interests of society as a whole cannot be compromised. Full report in The Mercury (subscription needed) Judgment