News
Court frees man after lack of evidence sinks aggravated defilement case
"The prosecution failed to prove that it was the accused who committed the sexual act," she ruled. The court noted that neither of the complainant's parents saw the accused together with the girl. Instead, they relied on information allegedly obtained from other people who did not testify before the court.
"The prosecution failed to prove the participation of the accused in either aggravated defilement or aggravated trafficking in persons. Mere suspicion cannot be relied upon to convict," Justice Kalibbala ruled. Credit: Hudson Apunyo)
By: Hudson Apunyo, Journalist @New Vision
LIRA - The High Court in Lira has acquitted a man who spent more than three years on remand facing charges of aggravated defilement and aggravated trafficking in persons after finding that the prosecution failed to prove he was the perpetrator, despite evidence that the teenage complainant had been sexually abused.
Justice Sarah Birungi Kalibbala held that while there was sufficient evidence showing the complainant, who was 15 at the time, had engaged in sexual intercourse and that the accused, Jimmy Okello, was HIV positive, the prosecution failed to place him at the scene of the crime or prove beyond reasonable doubt that he committed either offence.
The ruling brought to an end Criminal Session Case No. 126 of 2023, in which the State accused Okello of aggravated defilement under the Penal Code and aggravated trafficking in persons under the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act.
According to the prosecution, the teenage girl disappeared from her parents' home on the night of December 25, 2022.
After an unsuccessful search, relatives were informed that she had last been seen in the company of Okello before she was later traced in Dokolo district. Police subsequently arrested Okello and charged him with the offences.
However, after reviewing the evidence presented during the trial, Justice Kalibbala concluded that the prosecution's case was built largely on hearsay and suspicion rather than direct or corroborated evidence.
The judge accepted documentary evidence, including the complainant's child health card and school identity card, which established that she was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged offences.
Minor discrepancies over whether she was 15 or 16 years old were found to be inconsequential because she was legally still a child.
Medical evidence also confirmed that the girl had sustained injuries consistent with sexual intercourse, while a police medical examination established that Okello was HIV positive, an element required to sustain the charge of aggravated defilement.
Nevertheless, Justice Kalibbala emphasised that proving those facts alone was insufficient to secure a conviction.
However, after reviewing the evidence presented during the trial, Justice Kalibbala concluded that the prosecution's case was built largely on hearsay and suspicion rather than direct or corroborated evidence.
The judge accepted documentary evidence, including the complainant's child health card and school identity card, which established that she was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged offences.
Minor discrepancies over whether she was 15 or 16 years old were found to be inconsequential because she was legally still a child.
Medical evidence also confirmed that the girl had sustained injuries consistent with sexual intercourse, while a police medical examination established that Okello was HIV positive, an element required to sustain the charge of aggravated defilement.
Nevertheless, Justice Kalibbala emphasised that proving those facts alone was insufficient to secure a conviction.
"The prosecution failed to prove that it was the accused who committed the sexual act," she ruled.
The court noted that neither of the complainant's parents saw the accused together with the girl. Instead, they relied on information allegedly obtained from other people who did not testify before the court.
The complainant herself did not testify during the proceedings, depriving the court of direct evidence linking the accused to the alleged offences.
Justice Kalibbala observed that attempts by the prosecution to introduce the complainant's statement as evidence were abandoned following legal objections, leaving the case without the testimony of its central witness.
She ruled that the parents' evidence amounted to hearsay and therefore could not safely be relied upon to convict.
The judge further noted that witnesses merely stated that the complainant had been seen in the company of the accused and two other men before she disappeared.
"Seeing the victim with the accused and other males does not imply that the accused had sexual intercourse with her," the judge observed.
The defence introduced another man, identified as Sam Tony Odongo, into the sequence of events.
According to the defence, police instructed Okello to telephone Odongo, who allegedly arranged for the girl to travel from Dokolo and later intended to facilitate her journey to South Sudan.
Justice Kalibbala found that the emergence of a third person created reasonable doubt that was never adequately investigated or rebutted by the prosecution.
"The prosecution failed to eliminate the involvement of the third person introduced into the evidence," she ruled.
On the trafficking charge, the court agreed that the complainant had been transported from Lira to Dokolo and that there was evidence suggesting the intended destination was South Sudan.
The judge also accepted that the child may have been taken without the consent of her parents, satisfying one of the elements of trafficking.
However, she ruled that prosecutors again failed to establish that Okello was responsible for transporting or recruiting the girl.
Justice Kalibbala observed that the available evidence instead suggested the complainant appeared intent on travelling to South Sudan, where she reportedly later went while the accused remained in custody awaiting trial.
The court held that mere suspicion, however strong, could not replace proof beyond reasonable doubt.
"The prosecution failed to prove the participation of the accused in either aggravated defilement or aggravated trafficking in persons. Mere suspicion cannot be relied upon to convict," Justice Kalibbala ruled.
She consequently acquitted Okello on both counts and ordered his immediate release unless he was being held on other lawful grounds.
The court noted that neither of the complainant's parents saw the accused together with the girl. Instead, they relied on information allegedly obtained from other people who did not testify before the court.
The complainant herself did not testify during the proceedings, depriving the court of direct evidence linking the accused to the alleged offences.
Justice Kalibbala observed that attempts by the prosecution to introduce the complainant's statement as evidence were abandoned following legal objections, leaving the case without the testimony of its central witness.
She ruled that the parents' evidence amounted to hearsay and therefore could not safely be relied upon to convict.
The judge further noted that witnesses merely stated that the complainant had been seen in the company of the accused and two other men before she disappeared.
"Seeing the victim with the accused and other males does not imply that the accused had sexual intercourse with her," the judge observed.
The defence introduced another man, identified as Sam Tony Odongo, into the sequence of events.
According to the defence, police instructed Okello to telephone Odongo, who allegedly arranged for the girl to travel from Dokolo and later intended to facilitate her journey to South Sudan.
Justice Kalibbala found that the emergence of a third person created reasonable doubt that was never adequately investigated or rebutted by the prosecution.
"The prosecution failed to eliminate the involvement of the third person introduced into the evidence," she ruled.
On the trafficking charge, the court agreed that the complainant had been transported from Lira to Dokolo and that there was evidence suggesting the intended destination was South Sudan.
The judge also accepted that the child may have been taken without the consent of her parents, satisfying one of the elements of trafficking.
However, she ruled that prosecutors again failed to establish that Okello was responsible for transporting or recruiting the girl.
Justice Kalibbala observed that the available evidence instead suggested the complainant appeared intent on travelling to South Sudan, where she reportedly later went while the accused remained in custody awaiting trial.
The court held that mere suspicion, however strong, could not replace proof beyond reasonable doubt.
"The prosecution failed to prove the participation of the accused in either aggravated defilement or aggravated trafficking in persons. Mere suspicion cannot be relied upon to convict," Justice Kalibbala ruled.
She consequently acquitted Okello on both counts and ordered his immediate release unless he was being held on other lawful grounds.