Diamond dealers denied bail
Lebogang Mosikare | Thursday September 8, 2016 15:35
The trio, Moagi Dodile, Victor Kambela and Goitseone Dodile, were found guilty of possessing rough or uncut diamonds worth P6,500 in 2015 at a Francistown filling station without permission. Chief Magistrate Gaedupe Makgatho slapped the trio with a five-year sentence each for the offence after they all pleaded guilty. They were set to serve the sentences in full as Makgatho found no extenuating circumstances.
The trio appealed their conviction and this week pleaded with Nyamadzabo to free them on bail pending the appeal. The applicants said they were not advised of their rights to engage attorneys and had actually not been found in possession of the precious stones.
In addition, the trio said they would suffer prejudice if imprisoned while awaiting their appeal. In his judgment, Nyamadzabo said the trio’s arguments rang hollow.
“It is recorded in page one of the trial court that they were advised of their right to engage attorneys. They each say they don’t recall such advice and further say they were not actually asked whether they wanted to engage attorneys.
“As regards to possession, it involves physical and mental possession. Furthermore if there are two or more persons with the knowledge and consent that the rest have anything in their possession or custody, it shall be deemed and taken to be in their custody and in possession of each and all of them.
“(Furthermore) there was no prejudice suffered by the applicants in their sentence as the correct punishment was cited and used by the trial magistrate when sentencing them,” Nyamadzabo said. Nyamadzabo said the convicts each admitted personal possession of the precious stones, which they all knew were diamonds or had knowledge of such possession.
“The onus therefore lies on the applicants to show why following their conviction by a competent court, they should be granted bail. Factors to be considered by the court in applications of this nature include prospects of success on appeal and the possibility that the applicants would have served a substantial portion of their sentence by the time their appeal is heard,” he said.
The judge said there was no material irregularity by the magistrate resulting in any prejudice to the applicants nor were there any prospects of success on appeal as the evidence and the law had properly supported the convictions and sentence.
He added that it could not be said that the applicants would have served a substantial part of their sentence by the time their appeal is heard.
Bianca Ockhuisen represented the state in the matter while the applicants appeared in person.