By Kuvee Kangueehi Windhoek The prosecution in the case of the State versus former Judge Pio Marapi Teek appears to have suffered a major blow after it emerged yesterday that an investigating officer from the Women and Child Abuse Centre Inspector Johanna Haraes withheld critical evidence from the Office of the Prosecutor General. Haraes admitted to the presiding South African Judge Ronnie Bosielo that she did not make an attempt to scrutinise or investigate and report new evidence to the PG’s office. The crucial piece of information is said to be that the alleged victim had informed her parents that Teek never committed any sexual act or supplied the minor with alcohol. The new piece of evidence, which Judge Bosielo described as the basis of the case, was confirmed by another key witness Silva Kaunozondunge, who in her testimony said she never asked her daughter and her daughter never told her what happened on the night she slept at Teek’s residence. She only heard about the story when her daughter was telling the police officers. Kaunozondunge also noted that she informed Haraes that her daughter wanted to withdraw the case because the allegations never took place. Judge Bosielo was stunned that Haraes overlooked such important evidence and noted that his (the judge’s) duty was to see where the truth lies and it would be difficult if the investigation was not done properly. “Is it how justice is administered?” Teek’s lawyer Richard Metcalfe demanded and noted that the investigators applied selective investigations and left out any information which was in favour of the accused. When the court proceedings started yesterday in Court B, the former Supreme Court Judge pleaded not guilty to all the charges as he appeared before Judge Bosielo. In explaining his plea which was read by Metcalfe on his behalf, Teek noted that on Friday, January 28, 2005 he was in the vicinity of the Single Quarters looking for his labourer Rodger Kami at approximately 9 pm, as he needed assistance with work on his plot on the following day. He said that as he stopped, he was approached by a group of six children. “They admired the vehicle I was in, a Mercedes Benz 240 E and asked for a ride.” The former judge said he agreed and all the boys got in and he drove them around the Open Market and dropped them at the same spot, whereafter he did the same with the girls. “After dropping off the girls, one of the boys requested money and I gave them five dollars and one girl I gave one dollar.” He added that one of the girls insisted that he must give them money because they were hungry and had eaten nothing all day. “I asked them what such small children were doing out late at night and where their parents were and they replied that their mothers were in Single Quarters and that their fathers were not at home and that their mothers always beat them.” The former judge said he felt sorry for them, as they were dirty and thin looking. He said he told them that he would take them to his house to give them food and then bring them back and speak to their parents. In the affidavit, Teek further noted that at his plot, the girls cooked meat for themselves, watched television and went for a swim. “Whilst they were swimming, I went to lie on my bed as I had taken a Periactin tablet and had some beer to drink and I was extremely drowsy and sleepy.” Teek testified that he only woke up at 24h00 and found the children sleeping on the sofa. He tried to wake them up, as he wanted to take them back home but they remonstrated and did not want to get up. So he only took them back the next morning, he said. Teek said the next morning he also discovered two empty beer bottles and two glasses that smelled of brandy on the table in the lounge and confronted the two girls. He concluded that he acted in a noble manner. He merely had good intentions to assist the two hungry children and had no intention whatsoever of depriving their guardians of custody of the children. The hearing continues today at 10h00.
20 ° C