A BULAWAYO woman accused of forgery, which led to the attachment of property valued at over US$30 000 belonging to a UK-based Zimbabwean, has filed an application for discharge, citing lack of evidence linking her to the alleged crime.
Sithabisiwe Ncube (44) is accused by Timothy Moyo of forging his signature to obtain a court order that resulted in the attachment of his wife’s Mercedes-Benz E220, imported from the UK in 2021, as well as several household items.
Ncube claims that Moyo owed her a substantial sum of money.
The Bulawayo City Council employee appeared before Bulawayo regional magistrate Collet Ncube facing charges of forgery and fraud. On January 28, her lawyer, Tinashe Tashaya of Tashaya Law Chambers, filed the discharge application, arguing that the State has not presented sufficient evidence against her.
The case proceeded to trial, with the State presenting evidence from two witnesses, including Moyo and a handwriting expert. In her submission, Ncube contended that the State has failed to establish a prima facie case.
“It is the accused’s contention that the evidence adduced for the State so far does not prove the essential elements of the offence. There is no reasonable court that can safely act on it and find a conviction,” Ncube argued.
Her lawyers also highlighted discrepancies in the evidence presented by the handwriting expert. They pointed out that the expert examined a summons dated September 2, 2024, rather than the actual acknowledgement of debt dated October 13, 2023, which was the document in question.
“In his own report on conclusion, the handwriting expert says the following; the questioned signature on Summons case number CG352/25 dated 2 September 2024 was not authored by the same person who authored the standard signature samples in this case Moyo,” the lawyers submitted.
- Uproar over census figures
- Byo Arts Festival in turmoil…One year later, festival has yet to pay artists…Organisers play cat and mouse with artists
- Bulawayo struggles to clear housing backlog
- Council acts tough on debts
Keep Reading
“The acknowledgement of debt in question firstly is not summons neither does it have the cited case number. Secondly, the acknowledgement of debt in question is dated October 13, 2023 and not 2 September 2024 as per the examined document. What this implies is the signature examined and by which the expert arrived at a conclusion is not the questioned signature hence any final conclusion of forgery will be misplaced.”
They further argued that the expert did not compare the signature on the acknowledgement of debt with Moyo’s older documents, such as his UK driver’s licence, passport and Zimbabwean ID, which show inconsistencies in his signature pattern.
“This clearly shows that the complainant signature pattern is not consistent hence chances of his manipulation of the acknowledgment of debt signature,” the application read.
Regarding the fraud charge, Ncube’s lawyers referred to messages exchanged between the accused and the complainant, where Ncube acknowledged the debt was US$15 000.
The complainant and his wife disputed only an additional US$1 000, suggesting that Moyo owed Ncube a significant sum and undermining his claim that he had borrowed only US$6 000.
“It further shows that the complainant is not a credible witness and this court should discard all his testimony,” they argued.
The lawyers also submitted that the State failed to prove that the acknowledgement of debt was forged, adding that it also failed to prove essential elements of the offences while its evidence was manifestly unreliable.
“Thus the accused person is entitled to a verdict of not guilty and acquitted in both counts. Wherefore accused person pray that the court returns a verdict of not guilty and be acquitted in both counts,” the application read.
The ruling on the discharge application is expected on February 26.
