Breaking NewsHeadline News

Ballistics expert quizzed over his testimony

A Ballistics expert has told the Lusaka High Court that the first bunch of firearms used in the event that laid to the killing of State Prosecutor Nsama Nsama Chipyoka and UPND member Joseph Kaunda were handed to him for examination, six days after the incident on December 29, 2020.

The expert witness further testified that the firearm bearing serial EN2650 alleged to have been used to shoot the two victims was only handed over to him on December 31, 2020.
This is in a matter where 25-year-old police officer, Fanwell Nyundu, is accused of shooting dead Mr Nsama and Mr Kaunda.

The two victims were killed December 23, last year, when President Hakainde Hichilema, then as opposition leader, appeared for questioning at the Police Service headquarters over a farm he acquired in Kalomo.

When the matter came up for continued trial, during cross examination, defence lawyer Willis Muhanga, quizzed Ballistics expert Assistant Superintendent Daniel Banda to explain how he arrived at the conclusion that the victims were killed by the same bullet and the firearm bearing serial EN2650 was the one used according to his testimony.

Mr Banda was asked if he knew the exact position of Mr Kaunda for him to state in his report that the victims’ bodies lay in the same flight path?
In his response he stated that at the time the investigation team which included him arrived at the scene of crime, they did not find the second victims’ body (Kaunda) and so they assumed that it was where the brain tissue was found.

Mr Muhanga quizzed further,” How come your report said the bodies lay in the same path when the other body was not at the scene?”
Witness replied,” It is because the second victim was shot in the head, that was a fatal shot and having observed the brain and blood tissue on that spot, I took it that that’s the place where the body lay,” the witness said.

Asked whether he found out who removed Mr Kaunda’s body from the crime scene to ascertain the position, he responded in the negative stating that it was not within his jurisdiction to ascertain.
Mr Banda also told the court that the recovered cartilages were handed over to him by scene of crime officers, therefore was not in a position to state they were the ones picked at the scene or were different.

He also stated that he did not know where the firearms were before they were handed over to him .

The witness also said that he was not in a position to know if someone used the firearms after the incident and before he received them.

Back to top button