It's judgement day in Tanzania’s landmark murder case

Geita. The High Court is today, Tuesday, August 27, 2024 scheduled to deliver a judgement in a high-profile murder case of Milembe Suleman, originally scheduled for yesterday.

The judgement was postponed yesterday, with High Court Judge Kelvin Mhina announcing yesterday that the delay was due to the complexity of the case itself, including the large number of witnesses, and the need for thorough review of evidence.

The case involves 29 witnesses and 371 pages of documents, which require careful examination before a judgment can be rendered.

Judge Mhina explained, "The case is lengthy and demands adequate time to read and draft the judgment. While the public is eagerly awaiting the outcome, it is crucial to ensure that justice is served fairly and comprehensively for both sides." He emphasized that the judgment is still within the 90-day period allowed for delivering verdicts, with the final deadline being September 29, 2024.

This marks the third postponement of the judgment in this case. The decision was initially set for July 19, 2024, but was delayed to August 23, 2024, then August 26 and was later rescheduled to today (August 27).

The remaining defendants in the case are Dayfath Maunga (30), Safari Labingo (54), Genja Deus Pastory, and Musa Pastory (33), who face charges of murdering Milembe Suleman. Cecilia Macheni, one of the original five defendants, was acquitted after the court found insufficient evidence against her.

Yesterday, a large crowd, including family members of the deceased and the defendants, gathered at the court in anticipation of the judgment. The defendants, who are representing themselves, have consistently claimed their innocence and requested the court to acquit them.

Prosecution evidence

The second and third witnesses described how Milembe's phones were found in a toilet pit after Genja Pastory, the third defendant, placed them there.

The sixth witness, Christopher Matola, a medical officer at Geita Regional Hospital, testified that the cause of death was extensive bleeding from severe wounds inflicted by a sharp object.

The 11th witness described how Dayfath Maunga (30), the first defendant, sought out killers to murder Milembe Suleman and paid them Sh2.6 million.

The 13th witness described how Genja Pastory, the third defendant, confessed to the murder and posed as a traditional healer.

According to the caution statement, on April 25, 2023, at 9 a.m., while placing medicine in Milembe's houses in the Mwatulole area, Genja asked Milembe, who had a torch, to kneel down. When she complied, he began cutting her in various parts of the body, causing her to collapse, after which he cut off her head.

Witness 24, Detective Corporal Hashimu, described how they arrested the defendants. On May 1, 2023, they arrested Dayfath Maunga at Milembe's home in Usagara, Mwanza. After interrogation, she directed them to Safari Labingo, the second defendant.

Safari's arrest led to the apprehension of Musa Pastory, the fourth defendant, who helped locate Genja Pastory, the third defendant. Genja allegedly visited traditional healer Cecilia Macheni to remove bad omens after the murder.

Witness 26, a chemist from the Government Chemist Office, Ally Kanenda, testified that DNA tests on blood swabs from the knife handle used to kill Milembe Suleman matched Genja Pastory's DNA.

Defense

In their defense, guided by their lawyers, the defendants claimed they had never met or communicated before their arrest.

Dayfath Maunga, the first defendant, admitted living at Milembe's house and working in her cosmetics shop, assisting with her money-lending business. She denied allegations of involvement in same-sex relationships with the deceased, stating they were false and that she had no motive for the murder.

The second defendant, Safari Labingo, claimed he did not know the first defendant and had never communicated with her. Regarding Musa and Genja and the alleged murder plot, he denied any knowledge or involvement.

The third defendant, Genja Pastory, denied showing the police where the knife was. After being taken from the station, he was driven to a thicket and asked to locate a knife. When he found it, he claimed not to recognize it and disputed the accuracy of the fingerprints.