After spending four dreadful years in prison, a former state prosecutor Chimbisane Sechele’s appeal over his 15-year jail sentence for rape was recently upheld by the Francistown High Court.
Sechele was convicted and sentenced by Francistown Magistrate Court in August 2021 for raping a security guard who was working at his workplace, the Francistown Directorate of Public Prosecution offices. The alleged rape is said to have occurred in May 2012.
According to evidence given in the lower court, the complainant a 24-year-old woman at the time, alleged Sechele to have lured her to his house in Block 4, where he forcefully, violently undressed her, dragging her to his bedroom, while punching her in the process, leaving her bruised and with a swollen face.
However, Judge Masilo Mathaka found Sechele to have been falsely incriminated in a sexual offence. He said how the alleged rape incident unfolded raised eyebrows.
“If the complainant’s evidence was something to go by, after the altercation and the assaults, the appellant still found it proper to engage in a potentially risky sexual activity of forcing the complainant to perform oral sex on him.”
“The question that comes to one’s mind is could the appellant have engaged in such a behavior at the risk of having his penis injured? It is highly suspicious that the appellant would have engaged in that sexual activity if the circumstances were as described by the complainant.”
Punching holes into the 15-year imprisonment term, Judge Mathaka however cautioned that he should not be seen to be implying that in rape matters, a rapist cannot force the victim to give him a blow job.
In her evidence, the 24-year-old security guard said the appellant went into the house, leaving her in the vehicle for about 10 minutes. Time which the judge said was long enough for her to escape from the alleged rapist.
“Her conduct at this moment was completely irreconcilable with her purported apprehension. I am aware one of the reasons why she could not escape was that she did not know where she was. However, as said in her testimony, she was fearful of the appellant and under the circumstances logic would dictate that escaping would be uppermost in her mind,” pointed out Judge Mathaka.
“More so that she had a cellphone which she would use to seek assistance. Adding to that, for the entire period she was left alone she had the opportunity to use the cellphone to seek help but she did not take the opportunity despite her purported fears.”
“My observations are based on the facts of this case. It seems to me a misunderstanding arose after the sexual intercourse encounter and the situation escalated by the appellant’s arrogance of telling the complainant off,” Justice Mathaka added.
Given the foregoing, the Judge’s considered view is that doubt existed about the credibility of the complainant noting that the conviction as such is not safe. Sechele’s appeal was upheld and the conviction and sentence set aside.
