Moroka finally in court
Sharon Mathala | Friday November 6, 2015 15:00
Kgosietsile Ngakaagae represents Moroka whilst Letlhogonolo Makgane will represent Danster. The case is before Justice Godfrey Nthomiwa at the Lobatse High Court.
According to papers filed with the High Court, the two will argue whether Moroka has a case to answer or not.
For his part, the resident director of De Beers and newly appointed Chairman of Vision 2026, Moroka, through his lawyers has pointed out that he does not have a case to answer as Danster’s mother does not have a witness statement.
“The applicant has not responded to the respondent material and witness on the basis of which she seeks preparatory examination,” states Moroka.
Moroka further argues that there are still no charges registered against him.
“The DPP and the Botswana Police Service have not been cited as parties to the application when the conduct of a preparatory examination involves their participation,” the papers further state.
As widely publicised, Moroka on April 22 2014, at his farm, allegedly accidentally shot and killed Danster at around 4pm. In his defence, Moroka said that he did not aim at Danster but his intent was to shoot at the troubling dog that had terrorised his farm.
In his statement Moroka swore that the bullet mysteriously took an 80 degrees angle turn and hit Danster and another person, who was standing on the left side of the deceased on the knee but sustained only a small wound.
The prosecutors despite the Police’s contrary accident reconstruction report accepted Moroka and his witnesses’ sequence of events. The Police in their report had engaged Police officers in Kgalagadi region, a police forensic ballistic experts as well as an accident reconstruction specialist. The Police through its investigators, had found that Moroka had a case to answer resorting to charging him with negligence and recklessness.
The experts ascertained the functionality of Moroka’s gun citing that the gun was perfectly functional, categorically dismissing Moroka’s version.
The papers previously leaked to Mmegi stated that the Police investigators found and filed that: “From the crime scene, it is impossible for the victim to sustain gunshot wounds if the gun was aimed/pointed at the entrance of the tent.
The only possibility would be the muzzle of the gun pointed at him and the gun being off safe mode and the trigger being pulled to start the firing process, either by intent or mistake on the person in possession of the firearm. The metal piece which was approximately one metre from the tent would not course any deflection nor ricochet to divert the gun shots at an angle of approximately 80 degrees to the position where the victim stood”.
But the state dismissed Moroka’s possible charge (s). It surfaced that in September 2014, the then DPP director, the late Leonard Sechele issued a ‘nolle prosequi’ certificate to stop and discontinue criminal prosecution against Moroka for fatally shooting Danster at his farm citing that the whole incident was an accident and that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute.
Sechele was basing his finding on the analysis by the assistant director of public prosecutions Nomsa Moatswi who wrote to the DPP deputy director saying; “The evidence of those who witnessed the incident does not in any way suggest rashness or negligence on the part of the accused person”.
The DPP deputy director Kabo Leinaeng Leinaeng in his analysis also stated that, “…none of the eyewitnesses have alluded to any recklessness or negligence on the part of the accused person. I therefore in the final analysis recommend that a nolle prosequi be entered in favour of the accused”.