Tendai Rupapa Senior Court Reporter
The woman alleged to have been raped by Prophetic Healing and Deliverance Ministries leader Walter Magaya has revealed that there were “forces” behind the case that wanted the man of the cloth jailed.
In a withdrawal affidavit dated November 8, that was produced in court by magistrate Mr Vakayi Chikwekwe, the woman narrated how she has been receiving death threats for the past four months from unknown people if she fails to testify in court to get Magaya convicted.
“I have received threats from people who are threatening to shoot me in the event that I do not testify well in order to get the accused convicted, if by any chance I decide to withdraw the matter.
- Failure to provide trial date irks Magaya
- Magaya demands trial date as prosecution dithers
- Relief for Magaya
“I then realised that if I do not win this case or do not do what they expect me to do, my life is in danger. I have come to the conclusion that this case is now beyond me,” reads part of the affidavit.
The woman further claimed that she has not been living a normal life since the commencement of the case in August.
“I have also come to understand that a greater evil are the people outside this matter that want me to get the accused convicted, even if it means adding lies to my testimony in court. I am not able to go through with this case.
“I cannot testify under these conditions in court knowing that I have to perform in a way that these people who are threatening me desire.”
She added that Magaya had no influence in her decision to withdraw the case and neither had he contacted or paid her.
“Please note that I was not forced by anyone to withdraw my case. It should be noted that at the time of the withdrawal, the accused has not contacted me or given me money to withdraw. I did this out of my own free will,” reads the affidavit.
However, Mr Chikwekwe could not place the affidavit in the record, citing that it was unproceeduraly tendered to him since it had been placed in his office under the door.
The prosecutor, Mr Sebastian Mutizirwa who was seeking for a further postponement of the matter denied knowledge of the origins of the affidavit.
Mr Mutizirwa called one policeman, Mr Mutumwa Zvidzai (rank not given) who is part of the investigating team to support the application for postponement of the matter on the basis that it was still at the Prosecutor General’s office.
Mr Zvidzai said, “The docket was referred to the PG’s office for further directive and it was returned with a couple of instructions which we (police) complied with and yesterday (Monday) it was returned back to the PG’s office and it would be sent to this court for a trial date any day from now.”
Mr Zvidzai, however, confirmed that the complainant had approached the police on November 9, notifying them that she intended to withdraw the matter.
During cross examination by Magaya’s defence team comprising Messrs Everson Chatambudza, Admire Rubaya and Oliver Marwa, Mr Zvidzai failed to explain why the withdrawal affidavit had not been placed in the docket.
He said the PG’s office determines the route a case follows. He added that he could not comment further on the affidavit saying it would be prejudicial to the decision of the PG’s office.
Mr Marwa told the court that there were two divisions in the case: “Your Worship, the police is saying they will suffer no prejudice if accused is removed from remand, while the State is opposing our application for refusal of further remand. The police do not foresee any problems in locating the accused if need be,” he said.
Mr Rubaya chipped in and accused the State of abusing the court.
“Your Worship, when two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers and in this case, our client is the grass. There is no guarantee that our client would be furnished with a trial date on the next remand,” he said.
Commenting on the withdrawal affidavit, Mr Rubaya said, “I will not take lightly the issue of the affidavits. Complainant wants to withdraw. If she wants to withdraw, why should the accused remain on remand? There are certain forces, political and religious prepared to stop the wheels of justice in a bid to get to our client.”
In his ruling for refusal of further remand, Mr Chikwekwe said the State should be afforded another chance to put its house in order.
He dismissed the application and remanded the matter to November 30.