Gushungo bomb suspect’s request for mobile phone printouts granted | The Herald February 23, 2016
Fungai Lupande Court Reporter
The court yesterday granted access to telephone communication between one of the suspects accused of attempting to petrol-bomb the First Family’s Alpha Omega Dairy Farm in Mazowe and an army official he communicated with pertaining to the offence.
In her ruling, magistrate Ms Fadzai Mtombeni also ordered details of ownership of Alpha Omega Dairy to be availed to the defence.
She said the accused faced life imprisonment if convicted, therefore he needed all the documents to prepare his defence.
“State must avail to the accused all the necessary documents to prepare his defence,” she said.
“Access to service provider for mobile numbers 077 709 2200 and 071 680 0343 is hereby granted. The State must serve the defence with documents of ownership of Alpha Omega Dairy.”
However, Ms Mtombeni ruled that it was improper to split charges and evidence during trial will cure interpretation of the charges.
This came after Borman Ngwenya (30) – who is a member of the ZNA attached to 1 Field Regiment – requested the court to order Econet Wireless Zimbabwe and NetOne to produce printouts of his mobile number and that of the army officials he communicated with.
Ngwenya, through his lawyers, Mr Musindo Hungwe and Mr Exactly Mangezi, said in his defence he wanted to prove telephone communications between him and certain members of the ZNA relate to the charges before the court.
They also wanted charges of terrorism quashed on the basis that Alpha Omega Dairy was not a State property.
They also argued that there was improper splitting of charges by the State.
Ms Mtombeni remanded the matter to March 7 for trial continuation.
Ngwenya’s alleged accomplice, Owen Kuchata (34), who is the leader of Zimbabwe People’s Front political party, was sentenced to nine years for the sabotage attempt.
Prosecutor Mr Michael Reza will call Kuchata as a State witness.
It is alleged that on January 22 around 4pm, police received a tip-off that the four were planning to bomb Alpha Omega Dairy’s processing plant and tuckshop during the night.
Acting on the tip-off, police proceeded to the farm and laid an ambush about 100 metres from the quartet’s target. At around 10pm, the detectives saw the men approaching the dairy’s processing plant and immediately arrested them.
COMMENTS
There is obviously a lot more to this story than what is told us in this confusing and poorly written Herald report. The report is dated 23 February and the offences are alleged to have taken place on the 22 January…a full month earlier. One would have expected an even half trained Herald journalist to have unearthed by now a lot more detail on the alleged offences, than what is given.
We, the readers, are expected to read between the lines and work out what really happened before the planned bombing, and then during the arrests of the accused. The report initially names and talks of two accused and then later it states that “the four” were planning to carry out the bombing. It is all very confusing. But reading between the lines there is the strong suspicion that the alleged bombers were recruited and then set up by a police agent provocateur who incited them to act to win some sorely needed public sympathy for the Mugabe family.
But we cannot even expect that sometime in the future “all will be revealed”.
I look forward with interest to what evidence will be led at the trial of the accused. Of course I am silly enough to assume that we Zimbabweans will be allowed to learn what really happened.
Won’t it be interesting and exciting when Disgrace herself stands up in the witness box as the alleged complainant and is asked to confirm that she is the owner of the farm that was the alleged target of the bombers?
After all the court will need to know whose property was targeted for the alleged bombing, and thus learn who is the true complainant in the matter?
Will Disgrace be able to intimidate the magistrate and convince the court that she is the true and rightful owner of the farm in question? Will she throw one of her frequent and angry “how dare you question me. Don’t you know who I am?” fits when the lawyer for the defence digs deep for the farm’s full acquisition details?
Will the defence lawyer be clever and brave enough to show the court that he went to the deeds office and there got irrefutable proof that the farm is rightfully owned by someone else?
Some sad and unfortunate fellow who had been thrown off the farm by Disgrace’s Mad Husband in one of his many “moments of madness”?
Let the show begin…