Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Namibia decisions
Decisions matching the current search
S v Amunyela (CC 13 of 2020) [2022] NAHCNLD 130 (13 December 2022)
The High Court of Namibia convicted the accused of murder, finding circumstantial evidence and last-seen evidence excluded any reasonable innocent inference.
S v Stuurman (CC 3 of 2021) [2022] NAHCMD 419 (11 August 2022)
The court found that the accused's version was inconsistent with the objective medical findings and credible witness testimony. The magnitude and nature of the baby's injuries could not be explained by an accidental fall, and the accused's repeated threats and admissions established direct intent. Circumstantial evidence, considered in totality, excluded any reasonable inference other than guilt.
Source excerpt
Sheehama v S (HC-NLD-CRI-APP-CAL 27 of 2021) [2022] NAHCNLD 34 (1 April 2022)
The High Court struck down a delayed criminal appeal after finding no proper explanation for the lateness and no reasonable prospects of success.
S v Gemeng and Another (CC 20 of 2016) [2022] NAHCMD 145 (29 March 2022)
High Court judgment on rape charges based on circumstantial and DNA evidence, with convictions on two counts and acquittals on related assault and complicity counts.
S v Mukuve (CRIMINAL 46 of 2021) [2021] NAHCMD 257 (27 May 2021)
High Court review setting aside convictions for culpable homicide and failure to render assistance, because the trial court relied on inadmissible hearsay and weak circumstantial evidence.
S v Ncamushe (1) (CC 10 of 2017) [2021] NAHCNLD 33 (31 March 2021)
High Court convicted the accused of murder with direct intent, upheld circumstantial evidence, and ruled a police warning statement inadmissible under section 217.
S v Elia (4) (CC 18 of 2018) [2021] NAHCMD 148 (30 March 2021)
The cumulative effect of the circumstantial evidence, including cell phone records placing the accused and deceased in the same vicinity, DNA evidence from the accused's vehicle, and the accused's conduct after the crime, proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused killed the deceased, robbed her, and attempted to defeat the course of justice.
Source excerpt
S v Ruben (1) (CC 21 of 2013) [2016] NAHCMD 382 (5 December 2016)
The High Court convicted the accused of murdering his partner, rejecting his alibi and relying on witness testimony, shoe-print evidence, conduct after the killing, and admissions.
S v Ngesheya (CC 22 of 2010) [2011] NAHC 297 (29 September 2011)
At the close of the State case, the High Court held the circumstantial evidence was insufficient and discharged the accused on murder, robbery and justice charges.
S v Geiseb (1) (42 of 2009) [2011] NAHC 260 (22 August 2011)
The court found that the circumstantial evidence, corroborated by multiple witnesses, established beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the perpetrator of both the rape and the indecent act, despite the absence of DNA evidence.
Source excerpt
Explore more
