Samuel Shinedima
IN the midst of the ongoing murder trial of Ernst Lichtenstrasser, who is accused of assassinating two NIMT-managers, Judge Christie Liebenberg of the High Court, has on Tuesday afternoon stopped the main trial, and subsequent ordered for a trial-within- a trial.
This is after the Defense Lawyer, Albert Titus, objected to the two testimonies put forth by the state witnesses, claiming they are being untruthful and that they violated his client’s rights to remain silent.
Inspector Ndeyapo Ashikoto, the first state witness of the day, and an employee of the Namibian Police at the Walvis Bay’s Serious Crime Division, testified that the accused person was informed of his rights in a language he understands, which was English, as per his choice.
She further testified that after his rights were explained, the accused was told that he has the right to get a legal representation of his choice or to apply for legal aid, to which the accused has allegedly said he doesn’t need a lawyer.
Ashikoto further testified that after interrogating the accused on the alleged issue of his transfer from the Arandis NIMT Campus to the Keetmanshoop Campus, the accused purportedly stated that his motive was accomplished, and that there was no need for him to be transferred from the Arandis NIMT campus anymore.
Defence lawyer Titus objected the witness statement “his motive is accomplished”, asking the wetness when such statement was stated by the accused.
To this, Ashikoto testified that she was present at the time when the accused said that, adding that she recalls every bit of the interview’s discussion, and that she subsequently wrote a statement about the interview.
Probing on the accuracy of her statement, Titus pointed out that the witness statement was written 8 months after the interview. He further questioned the state witness if such statement was written from memory or from notes taken on the day of the interview, to which she indicated that everything was written from memory.
“There was no warning statement taken I recall him saying that” She added.
Titus submitted to court that the witness is being untruthful. He argued that the accused person disputed that he has said his motives were accomplished, and that no one else’s testimony in the witness list is corroborating to Inspector Ashikoto, adding that all other witnesses did not mention what she mentioned.
Another state witness, Inspector Reinhold Christian Melensky, also a member of the Namibian Police, stationed at Okahandja as a Unit Commander of the criminal investigation unit, testified that the accused person was indeed informed of his rights.
However, Inspector Malensky further testified that the accused indicated, after his rights were explained to him, that he will contact his lawyer in order to be guided and advised accordingly.
“When we asked him about his relationship with the deceased persons, he said he was not happy with how they were running the affairs of NIMT. He further stated that they were forcing his transfer to Keetmanshoop, whilst his house and wife is in Otavi, and that would have been a huge burden to his finances. He further said that he was happy that they were gunned down” Melensky stated.
Inspector Malensky further stated that the accused informed them that he was a shooter, and that he could not fool them but tell them the truth. The accused allegedly said that he was worried about his age, and concerned about what would happen to his wife, should he go to prison.
“He immediately said he will withhold the truth, and that he first wants to consult with his lawyer. We stopped the interview.”. Malensky added.
It is alleged that the accused asked the officials to call his lawyers and he was given mobile phone to make a call. After the call, his lawyer arrived at the station in Arandis, and they consulted. After their consultation, the accused came back and told the authorities that his lawyer advised him to remain silent.
Inspector Malensky further testified that, on 15 May 2019, which is a month after the murder of the deceased, new information came up, about a report that they received from the Forensic department. The report indicated that cartridges found on the murder scene, and the cartridges found at the shooting range where Lichtenstrasser, and his son practice, and the cartridges found at the accused residents in Otavi, was fired from the same fire arm.
He further stated that the authorities decided to confront the accused, with an attempt to obtain further information that was relevant to their investigation, despite the directive from the accused’s lawyer; for the accused to remain silent. Further evidence was obtained on that day, including cell phone call records of him and his wife.
It was at this point when defence lawyer, Titus objected to the admissibility of any evidence or statement obtained after the directive to his client to remain silent, arguing that his client’s rights to remain silent were violated, and that both state witnesses who testified were deceitful.
The matter is ordered to return to a trial-within-a-trial, in order for the court to determine the admissibility of the evidence put forth by the state witnesses.
