Nigerian Televangelist Timothy Omotoso Acquitted of Rape Charges After Eight-Year Legal Battle in South Africa
- Victor Nwoko
- 23 hours ago
- 2 min read
Nigerian televangelist Timothy Omotoso and his two co-accused have been found not guilty after an eight-year legal battle, marking the conclusion of a high-profile rape case.
Omotoso, along with Zukiswa Sitho and Lusanda Sulani, appeared before the Eastern Cape High Court in Gqeberha, where the verdict was delivered. The three had faced multiple serious charges, including racketeering, human trafficking, rape, and sexual assault.
Omotoso was accused of grooming and molesting victims, some as young as 14. The prosecution alleged that he orchestrated these crimes with the help of Sitho and Sulani, who were said to have recruited and trafficked young women. The state claimed that Omotoso arranged for the victims to travel to various locations, including a hotel in Durban, as well as destinations in Israel and Nigeria.
During her ruling, Judge Irma Schoeman detailed the state’s case, which alleged that Omotoso would summon the complainants to his bedroom and sexually assault them. However, she pointed out that when the evidence presented by an accused is not adequately challenged in court, it is generally accepted as correct.
“Generally, the failure of the prosecutor to cross-examine an accused may be decisive, and an acquittal will likely result,” she stated.
Schoeman criticized the quality of cross-examination conducted by state prosecutor Nceba Ntelwa, stating that it was ineffective and failed to challenge the accused’s testimony.
“It had the effect that the accused’s evidence was not placed in dispute at all and therefore did not necessitate the calling of corroborative witnesses who might have bolstered their defense,” she explained.
Concluding that the state had not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge found all three accused not guilty and ordered their discharge on all charges.
Omotoso had been in jail since his arrest in April 2017 and had made several attempts to have the case dismissed or declared a mistrial. This included a request on January 16 of the previous year for the judge to reconsider an earlier judgment denying a discharge under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act. That request was dismissed.
Delays in the trial also resulted in some witnesses choosing not to continue with their testimonies, stating that they had moved on with their lives and were not willing to relive their experiences in court.
Comments