Kgosikwena launches another bid to regain freedom

| Thursday November 24, 2011 00:00

Yesterday, he launched an application for leave to move to the Court of Appeal to challenge his conviction and sentence for stock-theft. The last time he attempted to regain his freedom, he suffered a major setback when then High Court judge, Ian Kirby dismissed his appeal and added another year to the four-year jail term he was given. Justice Lot Moroka of the Lobatse High Court is to determine on December 14 whether Sebele has any prospects of success at the Court of Appeal.

At the hearing of the application of leave to appeal yesterday, Sebele's lawyer, Kgosietsile Ngakaagae argued that they have a strong case and urged Moroka to grant leave to approach the Court of Appeal. He said that central to Sebele's case is the question of credibility of the witnesses. 'This is particularly important to the extent that Sebele could only be properly convicted on credible evidence given by credible witnesses,' he asserted.

Ngakaagae stated that while all witnesses from the state were spared after express admission of falsehood, none from the defence enjoyed such magnanimity. 'The applicant is aggrieved that the same standard applied in appraising the state witnesses does not find expression in the way the judge dealt with defence witnesses,' Ngakaagae submitted. He added that the judge erred in meting un-uniform treatment to witnesses. He submitted that there are many reasons for the judge to acquit as there were for him to convict. 'The accused must of necessity and as a constitutional imperative be given the benefit of doubt,' Ngakaagae submitted.

He stressed that the judge erred in dismissing the claim that the prosecution witnesses could not in their circumstances have connived. The state prosecutor, Gabaikanngwe Kebalepile prayed that the application be dismissed. He submitted that the judge indicated that over and above scrutinising demeanour and language of the witness to assess issues of credibility, it is invaluable to consider the probabilities of the case.

'It is with utmost respect that we submit that Sebele's evidence could not stand this scrutiny,' he submitted. He said the judge assessed the evidence and applied the correct principles of law in arriving at his decision. He stated that the bulk of Sebele's grounds of appeal attack findings of facts and credibility of the prosecution witnesses by the judge. 'It is important to state at this stage  that the appellate court is reluctant to interfere with findings of fact by trial court,' he concluded.