HIGH Court judge Justice Gibson Mandaza is today expected to rule on the requests made by AMH senior journalist Blessed Mhlanga for electronic evidence critical in his freedom bid.
Mhlanga has been languishing in remand prison since his arrest for allegedly transmitting data messages that incite public violence.
Mhlanga’s lawyer Chris Mhike requested Justice Mandaza to intervene and order the State to release the evidence to the court and the defence so that the court make an informed determination in the case.
Mhike argued that what is written on the request for remand form was different from what was uttered in the recordings.
The defence said it tried to engage the State but it was not interested in that discussion.
“I tried to engage the State before commencing the court but he was not interested allowing the appellant to challenge the evidence.
“We can have an adjournment to midday to allow the State to avail these evidence,” Mhike said.
“This is important because the State presented the accused with quotes of words that have been allegedly transmitted which are completely different from the words on the request for remand case.
- Fresh land invasions hit Whitecliff
- Cont hero status reignites tribalism debate in Parly
- My critics don’t understand art: Rasta
- Creatives salute ‘Malume’!
Keep Reading
“The prosecutors have a warned and cautioned statement which they cannot release because of the privilege they have on the docket.
“We believe in the importance of video graphic evidence in securing our arguments,” he said.
Conversely the State said the defence should have requested the said evidence at the magistrate court where Mhlanga initially appeared.
Mhike challenged the States assertion that he did not request the evidence at the magistrate court and referred the judge to the court transcript saying he had tried to request the said evidence but magistrate Farai Gwitima could have none of it.
“lt is not true that the issue of evidence arrived for the first time on these proceedings. We did point to the issue of electronic and video graphic evidence at the lower court and we did attack the credibility of that evidence so it is a continuation of request from what we did at the lower court.
“We are raising this issue for the second time with the hope that the High Court will have a fairer hearing as the magistrate court did not want to
hear anything of that sought,” Mhike said.
“The State seems to be entrenching the views of the magistrates court so in our grounds of appeal we challenge the reasoning of the magistrate court.”
However, the judge took an adjournment to determine on the application for request of further particulars.
The judge is expected to rule on the request and the determination will direct the proceedings if there will be further arguments or ruling on bail.
On Thursday Mhike complained that his client’s record was being kept as a security record and that the process to retrieve the record from the security record room took time.
