By Kusekwa Kusekwa
The High Court sitting in Manyara has acquitted Paschal Damiano, alias Apolo, who had been charged with murder of his friend, Ismail Khalifa, a resident of Gidahababieg Village in Hanang’ District, on May 30, 2024.
Delivering her judgement recently, Judge Nenelwa Joyce Mwihambi ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt and consequently ordered the immediate release of the accused.
“I hold that the prosecution has failed to prove its case to the required standard. I accordingly acquit Paschal Damiano, alias Apolo. I order his immediate release from custody unless he is lawfully held for another cause,” she declared.
During the trial, the prosecution called four witnesses and submitted one exhibit – a post-mortem report. However, after evaluating the testimonies, the court found significant discrepancies in the evidence, particularly in the testimony of the deceased’s father, who was the key prosecution witness.
Judge Mwihambi observed that the father’s account was riddled with contradictions and doubts that were not sufficiently clarified by the prosecution.
“It is the firm view of this court that the discrepancies occurring in the evidence given by the deceased’s father are so crucial that they go to the root of the case and for that reason my hands are tied to warrant conviction of the accused,” she noted.
According to the father’s testimony, on the day of the incident—May 30, 2024—around 1:00 p.m.—he was sitting at home with the accused and another man named Kassimu, while his son Ismail was resting on a mat beside the house. After Kassimu left, he remained with the accused and the deceased. He claimed that the accused then struck Ismail on the head with an axe.
However, the court noted an inconsistency in this version. The father also stated that he had gone into the house for a few seconds, leaving the accused and the deceased having a normal conversation. The judge questioned how the deceased could have been asleep and conversing with the accused at the same time.
“This contradiction casts sufficient doubt on the credibility of the witness’ testimony. In criminal law, such doubt must be resolved in favour of the accused,” the judgement stated.
As the prosecution failed to eliminate this reasonable doubt, the accused was acquitted.
