Police ID parade under attack in rape case

WINDHOEKFRED GOEIEMAN
The credibility of a police identification parade has come under attack in a rape case, with the defence claiming that the victim and alleged perpetrator had been brought together at the Arandis Police Station prior to the exercise by the investigating officer.
Rape accused Kaviyene Gerson Kamoruao's attorney Brownell Uirab alleges the police pointed his client out to the complainant before the ID parade was held.
The lawyer told the High Court yesterday that the investigating officer had brought the accused and the victim together at a local police station before the identity parade was ever held in the matter.
On this occasion, it was allegedly put to Kamoruao in the presence of the alleged victim, that he had raped her.
He had denied the allegation, after which he was locked up.
Brownell said his client only at a later stage attended an official identification parade, where the complainant pointed him out as the perpetrator. “The identification parade must be rejected as not credible,” Uirab submitted.
He further said a witness who was allegedly with the complainant, her boyfriend and the accused shortly before the rape incident, also could not positively identify Kamoruao as the man they had been with.
“This completely exonerates my client,” the lawyer argued.
Kamoruao is accused of two separate rapes, which allegedly took place on July 21, 2007 and December 25, 2007 in Arandis. He is further charged with serious in connection with both incidents, as well as one charge of indecent assault.
He has denied all the charges.
Earlier Uirab maintained that both complainants were single witnesses, who presented uncorroborated evidence and that the so-called cautionary rule should apply. He said both alleged victims were not clear and satisfactory in their evidence.
Uirab further argued the December 25 or Christmas Day complainant had been “so drunk, she does not even know where she was”.
“The accused cannot be convicted on her version,” he argued.
According to him the case was postponed for two years to enable the State to obtain DNA test results, but nothing was found linking Uirab to this particular rape.
“No fingerprints, no semen or hair were found which could link him to the scene of the crime,” Uirab maintained.
He submitted the State dismally failed to prove its case against Kamoruao. He argued that the accused be discharged.
State attorney, Karin Esterhuizen, submitted that the doctor examining the complainant found there were injuries to her private parts and urged the court to accept that her injuries were caused by the forceful penetration.
Meanwhile, Judge Albert Siboleka stated that written arguments, submitted by Esterhuizen after the closure of the defence submissions, will be ignored due to the procedural rules of the court not being followed. However, her citation of cases in her argument may be considered.
The matter was postponed to October 15 for judgment.