Controversial Nigerian Pastor Timothy Omotoso who has been hauled before the courts in a protracted rape and human trafficking trial that spanned more than seven years, is a free man.
The same goes for his two co-accused, Zukiswa Sitho, 42, and Lusanda Sulani, 35.
The trio fell to their knees in prayer whilst still on the accused's bench, mere moments after Judge Irma Schoeman delivered her verdict in the Gqeberha High Court.
Schoeman said the state failed in its duties to prove that the accused was guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.
While Omotoso's supporters and churchgoers celebrated the victory, those who professed his guilt were left in shock and disbelief.
The conduct of State prosecutors
In her judgment, Schoeman touched on the unethical conduct on the part of the State during the trial.
During the trial, the defence accused the former prosecution team, which included State Advocates Nceba Ntelwa and Ismat Cerfontein, of being unethical, dishonest, and corrupt.
During a failed Section 174 application calling for his client's dismissal, Daubermann said the pair suborned witnesses to commit perjury.
According to Daubermann, the advocates attempted to mislead the court by presenting false evidence to obtain a conviction at all costs.
"Ntelwa and Cerfonteyn are corrupt prosecutors who lied to the court and put up a false case under oath," he said at the time.
Schoeman's judgment mentioned examples of the former prosecution team's mishaps, like how an indictment had been served on the accused at the start of the proceedings, one that they were required to plead to.
A second indictment was then served without informing the court or the defence of this fact. It only came to light later during the proceedings.
Cerfontein consulted with some of the witnesses. She realised that some of the witnesses' police statements differed from their versions during consultations or the indictment.
She advised Ntelwa, the lead prosecutor, and her seniors of the discrepancies.
Instead of obtaining the correct versions through written affidavits, Ntelwa wrote in an e-mail that the witnesses should be persuaded to stick to their versions as set out in their police statements to prevent a possible postponement.
Cerfontein brought this e-mail to the attention of both their seniors.
"Instead of sanctioning Mr. Ntelwa, despite realising the unethical suggestion, the secondary indictment was brought incorporating the amendments in accordance with the witness statements to Ms. Cerfontein.
Schoeman said the prosecutor's actions, including that of the seniors, amounted to irregularities.
"Further consultations with other witnesses by Cerfontein were canceled without reason.
"The probable inference is that Mr. Ntelwa did not want other witnesses to deviate from their police statements that could be disclosed during such consultations."
When Ntelwa was going to be replaced as a prosecutor in the trial, one of the complainants, Cheryl Zondi, wrote a letter to the National Director of Public Prosecutions, Shamiela Batohi, to complain about the decision.
She also objected to Cerfontein being assigned the case.
This letter was forwarded to the Acting Director of Public Prosecutions in Makhanda Advocate Nelly Sakata for his comments.
Schoeman said she was not privileged to the comments, but Ntelwa rejoined the prosecuting team shortly thereafter. At the same time, his seniors were aware of his suggestions about the complainants' statements and the suggestion that they had committed perjury.
Another questionable conduct on the part of Ntelwa was his openly speaking to a witness while she was under cross-examination, claiming that he was merely going to comfort her.
"As he was an officer of the court such assurance was accepted, however, due to the lying he later told the court I am not sure that it was in fact innocent.
"If he did consult with the witness, it amounts to unethical behaviour. See in this regard the code of professional conduct and ethics of the National Bar Council of South Africa Rule 36.2"
Other mentions were unredacted e-mails between prosecutors, which showed that Ntelwa's assurances that he did not know about contradictory statements were false because he was, in fact, informed by Cerfontein.
Hereafter, Daubermann brought an application for a mistrial.
In one of the affidavits filed by the state, Ntelwa said he did not know that digital penetration of genitalia constituted rape.
"It is inconceivable that a prosecutor with 14 years of experience that is involved with rape crimes does not know what the definition of rape is.
"He is either extremely incompetent, or he was dishonest when disposing of the affidavit," said Schoeman.
Ntelwa's establishment of a Whatsapp group that included all of the complaints also came under fire, though he claimed it was for "logistical" purposes only.
Cross-examination
Schoeman also noted the issue with the new State Advocates' handling of the case, in particular, their handling of the accused's cross-examination.
Daubermann took aim at State Advocate Joel Cesar and his colleagues for how the State handled its cross-examination of the accused.
Daubermann argued that the prosecution did not challenge his client's evidence, which meant that the evidence was accepted and deemed correct.
According to Daubermann, the State's cross-examination was so limited that it amounted to no cross-examination.
Schoeman said no thought went into the cross-examination of the accused.
"The trial was set for nine days to deal with the evidence.
"Accused 1 (Omotoso) testified for a whole day, setting out his defence, but the cross-examination lasted less than a morning session.
"He was not cross-examined on his denial concerning the complainant's testimonies, no attempt was made to elicit inconsistencies or improbabilities."
According to Schoeman, there was ample evidence that the veracity of the evidence could have been tested.
"The cross-examination was shallow and lacked the intention to uncover the truth."
Comment from the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) noted the judgment and said that the prosecuting team would study it and decide which legal avenues to explore.
Spokesperson Luxolo Tyali outlined what had caused numerous delays.
"In as much as the NPA does not seek to secure conviction at all costs, it remains committed to ensuring justice is served for the victims of crime and will go at all lengths to give a voice to the victims by exploring all the possible avenues," he said.
