Roland Routh
Windhoek-Legal aid lawyer Bronell Uirab late last week withdrew from the trial of Andre Friedel Castro Dausab, the man convicted of the brutal murder of his pastor-in-training girlfriend, citing irreconcilable differences.
According to Uirab, the accused charged that he did not represent him honestly and to the best of his abilities during the trial as he (Uirab) is a legal aid lawyer whose salary is paid by the government.
Uirab further said that Dausab accused him of colluding with the State to secure his conviction, deliberately concealing evidence from the court, and of failing to challenge evidence presented by the State.
This, Uirab said, led to an irrevocable breach of trust and he cannot in good conscience continue to represent Dausab.
He further told the court he views the allegations against him in a very serious light.
Dausab confirmed Uirab’s submissions and asked the court for time to enable him to gather sufficient funds to appoint a private lawyer.
Judge Shivute granted the withdrawal and Dausab’s request for a postponement and remanded the matter to November 6.
Before the adjournment, however, the sister of the deceased took the stand and informed the court the murder of the deceased has had an adverse effect on her family.
Kgakgamatso Monnaesi told the judge that since the death of her sister, her parents’ health has deteriorated and two of her younger brothers have resorted to using drugs and dropped out of school.
Monnaesi, who bravely supressed her tears, informed the court that all of it are to be blamed on the senseless murder of her sister whom she described as “a giving person” who studied theology so that she could make a difference in people’s lives.
According to the sister, the murder of their sibling has left the family shocked, with broken hearts and a lot of questions.
Judge Naomi Shivute found Dausab guilty of murder with direct intent on July 25 this year for slitting the throat of 33-year-old Gofaone Motlamme at the United Lutheran Paulinum Theological College in Pioneers Park, Extension One, on February 22, 2014.
In her judgement she said the accused had already declared his intention to kill the deceased and he just fulfilled what he had intended to do.
“The accused’s behaviour before, during and after the tragic event is not consistent with the conduct one would have expected from a person who had no recollection of the critical moment,” she said.
“The circumstances of the case reveal the accused was at all times conscious and able to direct his conduct or actions and could distinguish between right and wrong. He appears to be hiding behind the defence of non-pathological criminal incapacity because of loss of temper, anger, stress and frustration due to the deceased’s decision to end their relationship. This is a normal reaction to rejection in a love relationship. Therefore, the accused cannot be exonerated from his actions, as the defence cannot avail him. By repeatedly stabbing the deceased with knives is clear evidence of direct intent to kill the deceased. The accused therefore, unlawfully and intentionally, killed the deceased.”