• October 19th, 2018
Login / Register

Man convicted of drug dealing to remain in prison

Crime and Courts
Crime and Courts

Maria Amakali Windhoek A 52-year old man convicted of drug dealing will remain behind bars after his appeal against his sentence and conviction were dismissed in the High Court on Friday. Simon Nangaku was found guilty and got convicted of drug dealing after cannabis weighing 406 kg valued at N$1,2 million was found at his residence in 2011. Nangaku was then sentenced to 12 years behind bars, of which four years were conditionally suspended. Nangaku’s appeal was dismissed as his witnesses’ versions were full of contradictions and he tried to pass the blame onto his deceased brother, although the drugs were found in his bedroom. “Some time away from society might give the appellant the opportunity to re-evaluate his life and decisions and perhaps return as a reformed citizen,” said Judge Nate Ndauendapo. The 52-year-old approached the High Court stating that the magistrate who convicted him had erred in law by convicting him on a charge of dealing in dependence-producing drugs, rejecting his evidence and that of his witnesses and failing to properly analyse the State’s case, amongst many reasons. In 2011, through a tip-off the police raided his home in the vicinity of Hakahana, Katutura and discovered and confiscated 16 bags of cannabis weighing 406 kg. During the trial the investigative officer told the court that at the time the bust was one of the biggest in independent Namibia. Despite the evidence presented in court, Nangaku disputed it all, stating that the cannabis belonged to his brother who was residing at his house, but who at the time of trial had passed on. He further informed the court that although he owns the house he was not residing there when the drugs were seized. “The appellant failed to mention that the cannabis discovered was his brother’s,” said the judge. The court noted that it only became convenient to Nangaku to raise this argument after the passing of his brother. Considering the quantity and value involved this court would not have been satisfied if the appellant was [merely] fined for the crime in question,” Nate said.
2017-04-24 11:33:36 1 years ago
Share on social media

Be the first to post a comment...