Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro
Chief Court Reporter
Jailed businessmen Moses Mpofu and Mike Chimombe are set to renew their battle for freedom today as they appear before Justice Pisirayi Kwenda seeking leave to appeal both their convictions and sentences.
They were sentenced to 17- and 12-year prison terms, respectively.
This legal showdown could determine whether the two remain behind bars or secure a chance to argue their case before the Supreme Court.
The duo, previously convicted of fraud, filed their application for leave to appeal last week, a move that has drawn fierce opposition from the State.
The prosecution is far from satisfied with the leniency of the penalties handed down to the two offenders.
It is adamant that the sentences fail to reflect the gravity of the crime. Officials argue that the punishment does not deliver justice or send a strong enough warning to potential wrongdoers.
Represented by Advocate Tapson Dzvetero and Ashiel Mugiya, Mpofu and Chimombe argue that the High Court’s decision to convict them was riddled with legal errors.
Their legal team contends that the essential elements of fraud were not proven during the trial and that the court misdirected itself in concluding that the two had the necessary “mens rea” (criminal intent) to commit the alleged crime.
In his submission, Chimombe’s defence went further, accusing the court of veering from the original charges presented by prosecutors.
“The court a quo went on a frolic of its own,” his lawyers argued, claiming it abandoned the State’s central allegations and instead crafted its own narrative by focusing on the alleged theft of the corporate identity of Blackdeck (Private) Limited.
The severity of the sentences has also come under fire.
Chimombe’s legal team described his 12-year prison term as “manifestly excessive” and argued that it induces “a sense of shock.”
They claim the punishment is not only disproportionate to the alleged crime but also an irrational exercise of judicial discretion.
Similarly, Mpofu, who received a 17-year sentence, is challenging the court’s reasoning in finding him guilty as an actual perpetrator.
