By Staff Reporter| Former ZANU PF member, Acie Lumumba (William Mutumanje) has been released on bail.
Lumumba appeared in court 10 early Saturday morning at Harare Magistrate Court to answer for a case of alleged fraud.
The case has to do with the moving of money following an incident at the Harare international airport 2 weeks ago when it is alleged that he had knowledge of some US$, likely illicit, arriving at the airport. He allegedly got a baggage handler to withdraw $8,000 from that package. CCTV footage exposed the baggage handler who then told the police it was Lumumba who sent him.
But by the time court had opened Sat morning, the Complainant in the case had requested to drop charges.
As ZimEye reveals, it was determined at court that the case was opened by a third party, not the Complainant himself. (The Complainant’s name was not read out)9
Lumumba’s lawyer pleaded with the court saying, “Yes Your Worship in this matter, the state has been informed that the Complainant in this matter has an intention to withdraw the charges, he is not the one who reported the matter, it was reported by a third party and he arrived last night with an intention to withdraw, however the state has not afforded him such an opportunity and they have insisted that we appear in court. The Complainant is here and he is willing to confirm the position if called upon to do so, and the state can also confirm that that is the position at the moment. If the state may confirm, that they are aware, they have been made aware and they are the ones who have refused to make the withdrawal.
But the state prosecutor refused to drop the charges saying, “Your Worship I assert to maintain that there is need to thoroughly interview the parties before arriving at the position which my learned sister has highlighted to the court and in light of that the state applies that the matter be remanded to another date your Worship so that they can allow verification of the assertions which have been made by my nemesis.”
The magistrate sitting on the case ruled that “the court is tied to the state’s decision, they still want to investigate…. ” – MORE TO FOLLOW