The judge concluded that the state has not proven it’s case beyond reasonable doubt.
After an eight-year legal battle, Nigerian televangelist Timothy Omotoso and his two co-accused have been found not guilty, bringing the high-profile rape case to a conclusion.
Omotoso, along with his alleged recruiters, Zukiswa Sitho and Lusanda Sulani, appeared in the Eastern Cape High Court in Gqeberha, where the verdict was delivered.
The trio faced a range of serious charges, including racketeering, human trafficking, rape, and sexual assault.
Omotoso was accused of grooming and molesting his victims, some as young as 14.
According to the state, the pastor allegedly orchestrated these crimes through Sitho and Sulani, who assisted in recruiting and trafficking young women.
The prosecution contended that Omotoso arranged for the victims to travel to various locations, including a hotel in Durban, as well as destinations in Israel and Nigeria.
Timothy Omotoso rape trial judgment
Delivering her ruling, Judge Irma Schoeman laid out the state’s case that Omotoso would call the complainants to his bedroom and allegedly sexually assaulted them.
Regarding cross-examination, Schoeman pointed out that once the evidence of the accused in court is not challenged, it is considered correct.
“Generally, the failure of the prosecutor to cross-examine an accused may be decisive and an acquittal will likely result,” the judge said.
She said state prosecutor Nceba Ntelwa’s cross examination of the accused was of “poor quality”.
“It had the effect that the accused’s evidence was not placed in dispute at all and therefore, it did not necessitated the calling of corroborative witnesses if any who might have bolstered their defence,” Schoeman explained.
The judge concluded the state has not proven it’s case beyond reasonable doubt and found all three accused not guilty.
“They are discharged on all the charges,” she ruled.
Trial delays
Omotoso has been in jail awaiting trial since his arrest in April 2017.
He has tried on several occasions to have the case either dismissed or declared a mistrial.
This included an application made on 16 January last year, where the defence made an application for the judge to reconsider her previous judgment on the application for discharge according to Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
The discharge application was, however, dismissed.
The numerous delays in the trial caused some witnesses to no longer want to proceed with giving evidence as they indicated they have since moved on with their lives and are not interested in reliving their experiences in court
