Court acquits man accused of murder in Apac over lack of evidence

The High court sitting in Apac district, northern Uganda, has acquitted a man accused of murder, citing the prosecution’s failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

In a ruling delivered on April 4, 2025, justice George Okello concluded that the prosecution had not established the accused’s presence at the crime scene, a key element in securing a conviction.

The case centered around the death of Tom Richard Oleno, who was allegedly assaulted by a mob on February 11, 2020, in Abongodero village, Akokoro sub-county, Apac district. Oleno was reportedly beaten after being accused of stealing clothes belonging to a woman identified as Sabina Adule.

His body was later discovered at the home of the LC I vice chairperson, Patrick Okello, who subsequently reported the incident to police. Based on Okello’s initial statement, the accused was arrested the same day.

However, during the trial, the accused consistently maintained his innocence, asserting that he was at home at the time of the assault. Justice Okello emphasized that the burden lay with the prosecution to disprove the accused’s alibi.

“No witness placed the accused at the scene or saw him take part in the assault,” the judge noted, adding that the prosecution failed to conduct a proper investigation into the accused’s defense.

The prosecution primarily relied on testimony from police officers who cited statements from Patrick Okello. Yet during cross-examination, Okello contradicted those claims, stating he had not personally witnessed the attack but had only heard about it from Sabina Adule.

Adule, who passed away before the trial, was not available to testify, leaving a critical gap in the prosecution’s case. Justice Okello criticized the reliance on hearsay evidence and underscored that Adule could have been a key witness.

Her absence, coupled with inconsistent testimonies, weakened the prosecution’s case substantially. Citing precedent from previous Supreme court decisions, the judge reiterated that when doubt exists due to the prosecution’s failure to disprove a defense, the benefit of that doubt must go to the accused.

“The prosecution evidence is deficient in proving the participation of the accused in the murder,” he ruled, ordering the immediate release of the accused. Court assessors unanimously concurred with the verdict.