Televangelist Timothy Omotoso’s Trial: A Tug of War Between Defense and Prosecution

In a dramatic turn of events surrounding the trial of televangelist Timothy Omotoso, the defense has raised concerns about the possibility of an unfair trial. Omotoso, who is currently on trial in Gqeberha, faces charges related to rape and human trafficking.

Peter Daubermann, the defense attorney representing Omotoso, has criticized the conduct of Advocate Nceba Ntelwa, the state prosecutor during the initial trial, which was eventually discarded. Daubermann has submitted an application to the Gqeberha High Court, seeking the release of his client. He argued that the entire trial, including the testimonies of the complainants, was compromised due to the alleged misconduct of the prosecuting team. Specifically, Daubermann pointed out instances where the former prosecutor and the investigating officer reportedly communicated with witnesses during cross-examination. Furthermore, Daubermann accused Ntelwa of creating a WhatsApp group to discuss the case’s merits with witnesses, labeling such actions as unethical for a prosecutor.

In a counter-argument, the state has defended its actions, asserting that the trial against Omotoso has been conducted fairly. State prosecutor, Advocate Joel Cesar, emphasized that they would never present evidence that could lead to an unjust trial. He expressed confidence in the evidence they have, stating, “We maintain that the case has been handled fairly.” Cesar also highlighted their belief in the validity of the witnesses’ confessions, asserting that they present a strong case against Omotoso.

The trial has garnered significant attention, with many awaiting the court’s decision on the matter. The defense’s allegations, if proven true, could have severe implications for the prosecution team and the trial’s outcome. On the other hand, if the court sides with the state’s arguments, it could pave the way for a continued legal battle against Omotoso.

Judge Irma Schoeman is set to make her ruling public on 31 October, a date that many will be keenly watching. The outcome could set a precedent for future cases where the conduct of legal professionals is called into question.