National News

chanthunya fights ‘fake’ call logs

Murder convict Misozi Chanthunya has appealed his conviction and life sentence requesting the Supreme Court of Appeal to overturn the decision on the grounds that he was jailed based on bogus call logs.

High Court of Malawi and Supreme Court of Appeal  registrar Gladys Gondwe confirmed that Chanthunya, through his lawyer Michael Goba Chipeta, filed the appeal but declined to comment on its grounds.

The Blantyre-based businessperson was jailed in September last year by the High Court in Zomba for allegedly murdering his  25-year-old Zimbabwean girlfriend Linda Gasa in  August 2010.

“Yes, the appeal was filed and will be heard on June 29 at 9am. As regards the merits of the grounds of appeal, that’s the purview of the court,” she said in an interview on Tuesday.

But, according to the skeleton arguments supporting his appeal in the Criminal Case Appeal Number 01 of 2021, Chanthunya argues in his 222-paged appeal that the State particularly obtained the alleged ‘fake’ call logs for an undue intention in the proceedings.

During trial, the State tendered in court three call logs from Airtel Malawi Limited for Chanthunya, the late Gasa and her relation Jessie Kachale.

In an interview, Chipeta said even State witness Jacqueline Phiri, an employee of Airtel Malawi, conceded that she could not tell whether the purported call logs were doctored documents.

“The said purported call logs are not call logs at all. They are fraudulent documents specially procured for an unjust purpose in these proceedings,” stated Chipeta.

Among others, Chanthunya is querying the discrepancies in the call logs where in certain instances they are showing one person making calls from different places while some outgoing calls do not have corresponding incoming calls.

“The call logs show that everyone made the calls at exactly eight minutes past the hour. For example, at 03.08am, 04.08 am, 05.08am, 09.08am, 10.08am, 11.08am in the case of Gasa and Kachale’s call logs or 03.08, 04.08, 05.08, 06.08, 07.08, 08.08, 09.08, 10.08, 11.08 in the case of the accused person’s call logs.

“It is impossible that the callers had all agreed to make their calls only at exactly eight minutes past the hour and to wait for exactly one hour before making the next call,” argued Chipeta.

The call logs Weekend Nation has seen and analysed also show a person making or receiving several calls simultaneously using the same phone, although each call had durations, some lasting 133 or more seconds.

Further, Gasa and Kachale’s calls, except for two made at 12.08pm, show they were made in the morning as they have AM attached to them. 

On the other hand, Chanthunya’s call times have neither AM nor PM attached.

Again, Gasa’s call log does not show any call from Chanthunya and neither does Chanthunya’s call log show any call to her.

There is also a call from Gasa on Chanthunya’s call log without a corresponding outgoing call on her call log.

“The call log for Linda Gasa shows that she called Jessie Kachale three times on 4th August 2010 at 8.08am from Chichiri, 11.08am from Magalasi and 03.08am from Monkey Bay. This log’s locations show that Linda Gasa was in Monkey Bay early morning that day and in Blantyre later morning the same day.

“Yet, Jessie Kachale’s call log shows that Linda Gasa called Jessie Kachale only twice on 4th August at 5.08am from Monkey Bay and 05.08am from Monkey Bay. This log’s locations show that Linda Gasa was only in Monkey Bay early morning that day and not in Blantyre,” reads part of the court documents.

Chanthunya also wonders why after “grave inconsistencies” with respect to the number of calls made, the times at which the calls were made, additions and removals of certain calls on the date shown by the tendered documents, the Airtel employee could not tell whether the documents had been doctored.

“The witness was not even sure whether the call locations shown in the documents represented the truth… She told the court she cannot know whether the tendered call logs are fraudulent and doctored documents,” reads the document.

In an interview, Director of Public Prosecutions Steven Kayuni, who was part of the prosecution team, said while they admire the “ingenuity and innovation” of the arguments, commenting on the matter would be prejudicial.

“However, the pleadings were filed in court and the matter is coming for hearing. The probative value of the allegations is for the highest court in the land to ascertain. 

“We shall not overstep our mandate and comment of what the honourable justices of the Supreme Court of Appeal are supposed to determine. To do that is a cardinal sin that no litigant would want to fall into before a court makes its determination,” he said.

Chanthunya was convicted of three offences of murder contrary to Section 209 of the Penal Code, smothering and hindering burial of a dead body contrary to Section 131 of the Penal Code and perjury.

Related Articles

Back to top button