Kondoa rapist loses appeal

Justices Engela Kileo, Katherine Oriyo and Ibrahim Juma found that there was overwhelming evidence against Ramadhan, the appellant, which was adduced at the trial and as a second appellate court they have seen no justification for
interference with the two lower court’s findings as to facts.

“In the light of the above consideration, we have come to the settled view that the appeal by Issa Ramadhan is without substance and for this reason we must, as hereby do, dismiss it,” the justices declared.

During hearing of the appeal, the appellant had told the court that the charge against him was not proven because the victim of the crime did not testify in court and that no police officer was called to give evidence.

In their judgment, however, the justices ruled that the complaint by the appellant as regard to the failure of the victim of rape to testify had no foundation because it was not the first time that a court has arrived at a conviction without the testimony of the victim of the crime.

“There is also a litany of cases where testimonies of child victims of tender years have been expunged for non-compliance with the voire dire test and yet the courts arrived at a conviction independent of that evidence,” they observed.

As for the ground that conviction was wrongly entered because no police officer was called to testify, they were of the settled view that in the circumstances of the case the fact that no police officer testified in court did not water down the case for the prosecution. Records show that the victim of the crime (name withheld) who did not testify at the trial was a girl of unsound mind, as testified by her father.

On the material date, witnesses who had been called to testify participated in search of the victim of rape after an alarm was raised from the house of her father. In the course of the search, they heard a child crying and as they approached the place where they heard the cry coming from, they found the appellant in the act of raping the girl.

The appellant was apprehended and taken to the Village Executive Officer and eventually to court for trial. After the prosecution had closed its case, the appellant gave his defence based on general denial, claiming that he was arrested, beaten up and taken to the police and eventually to court for the charge of rape which he had not committed.