Iuze Mukube
A Zimbabwean couple and a mother, who are accused of murdering a nine-year-old girl, Akundaishe Natalie Chipomho in Windhoek between 23 and 25 January 2020, are challenging the validity of their warning statements.
Edward Nkata, Caroline Nkata and Rachel Kureva face one count of murder and further counts of violating a dead body, defeating or attempting to defeat the course of justice, fraud, alternatively uttering a forged document, forgery and contravening the Immigration Control Act.
The trio are arguing that their warning statements, statements taken from a suspect during a criminal investigation after they had been informed of their legal rights, were obtained in violation of their rights. The purpose of warning statements is to record the suspect’s version of events, to potentially use the statements as evidence in court, and to show that the suspect was informed of their rights before giving the statements, especially the right to remain silent and the right to legal representation.
The three Zimbabweans are contending that the statements should be rendered inadmissible in court due to their being taken when their legal rights had not been properly explained to them.
The trial-within-a-trial proceeding follows from the accused’s lawyers accusing police investigators involved in the matter of using deceit to trap their clients. Defence lawyers Milton Engelbrecht, Mbanga Siyomunji, and Joseph Andreas flat-out told Commissioner Nelius Becker, Inspector Lodewyk van Graan, and Inspector Natangwe Erastus that they are liars who used deceit to trap their clients.
Engelbrecht is representing Caroline Nkata while Siyomunji is for Edward Nkata, and Andreas is representing Kureva. According to the lawyers, the officers used deceit to get information from their clients. While the officers are adamant that they informed the accused persons of their rights, including the right to legal aid, the lawyers claim it was not done.
Edward claims his rights were not read to him, as he did not give a statement nor sign it. This is because at the time he was in hospital; hence, he was not in a sober state at the time due to pain and being under medication.
His defence is arguing he could not have given or signed the statement as he was in the hospital at the time he was to appear in court. Additionally, Caroline, Edward’s wife, is adamant her legal rights were not properly explained to her before she provided oral statements describing, rather than confessing to, the events of the incident.
Rachel, the victim’s biological mother, does not contend giving the statement, just that she never told the police when questioned on the whereabouts of the child that she was in Zimbabwe with her father. Warrant officer Josef Ndilyowike took the stand on Tuesday and yesterday to be cross-examined on the validity of the warning statements.
He said he properly explained the rights to the accused person, and he disputed Edward’s claim that he was not in a sober state due to pain and being on medication when the legal rights were read to him. He is adamant Edward was sober and could acknowledge, understand and respond to his questions quite well at the time.
It is alleged that between 23 and 25 January 2020, the Nkatas kicked and hit Chipomho with unknown objects on her body and head, leaving her unconscious, and that the couple then placed her in a plastic bucket and waited for her to die. The Nkatas subsequently proceeded to a nearby service station, where they allegedly purchased paraffin and matches.
Chipomho’s body was alleged to have been transported in a wheelie bin to a municipal skip located a distance from the flat, where it was dumped and set ablaze. The prosecution further alleges the Nkatas defrauded Progress Private School of N$6 000. It is alleged Caroline indicated to the school where she was employed as a teacher that Chipomho and an 11-year-old minor were her biological children. Thus, the minor children were not required to pay school fees by virtue of her being an employee at the school.
The couple is also accused of forging school reports for the children. They are further accused of overstaying in the country for seven months after their employment permits expired.