WINDHOEK - High Court Acting Judge Kobus Miller indicated Tuesday that he would deliver his judgement in the murder trial of 21-year-old David Elrico Kasupi tomorrow after hearing oral submissions on the verdict from both defence and State counsels.

Kasupi is on trial for the murder of his two-month pregnant girlfriend, Lady Daire, by slitting her throat during the period 4-5 January 2015 at Leonardville. 

He did not provide a plea explanation and also did not testify in his own defence.
It became clear, however, during cross-examination by his State-funded lawyer Jermaine Muchali that his defence is that he came across the deceased in a bushy area near her house, but that she was already dead.

Explaining the blood of the deceased found on his clothes and shoes, Muchali said his client’s version is that he held her in his arms, which explains how her blood ended up on his clothes.
On Tuesday, Muchali told Judge Miller that the State failed to prove the allegations against Kasupi and asked the court to acquit him on all charges.

Kasupi faces a charge of murder read with the provisions of the Combating of Domestic Violence Act and one of defeating or obstructing or attempting to defeat or obstruct the course of justice.
He pleaded not guilty to both charges at the start of his trial.

According to Muchali, the evidence presented at court does not support an inference by the court that the accused can be convicted by a court acting reasonably and carefully.
According to him, the whole case rests on circumstantial evidence with none of the evidence pointing in the direction of the accused.

He further said the investigation done by the police was very poor from the beginning and they focused their investigation on the accused after finding text messages from the accused on the phone of the deceased.

He went on to say that nothing in the text messages sent by the accused points to a motive for the accused to commit such a horrendous offence.
State Advocate Cliff Lutibezi submitted that the failure of the accused to testify in his own defence leaves the State’s evidence uncontested.

According to Lutibezi, if the accused wanted his instructions to his lawyer to carry weight and form part of the evidentiary material, he should have testified under oath in order to be cross-examined and this would have assisted the court in ascertaining if his version is credible.

In cases where the State proves a prima facie case against the accused and the accused does not testify, it is trite law and such evidence becomes conclusive, Lutibezi reminded the court.
He went on to say that the accused’s version of how he got the blood of the deceased on his clothes was developed as the trial progressed.

According to Lutibezi, the accused had at least two different versions, one is that he was not in the company of the deceased on that fateful night and the other that he found her dead body and held her.
This Lutibezi said is material contradictions that warranted an answer from the accused under oath. 
He asked the court to convict Kasupi of murder with direct intent, but conceded the State only proved attempt to obstruct the course of justice.Kasupi remains in custody.