KAMPALA — Defense lawyers in the Henry Katanga murder trial have objected to a forensic expert’s testimony—citing potential flaws including missing of his name hence compromising the status of the evidence presented to court.
Andrew Kizimula Mubiru, Acting Director of Forensic Services for the Uganda Police, testified as the 8th witness for the prosecution, presenting DNA analysis results from various exhibits.
However, defence counsel Kabatsi argued that Mubiru’s DNA report was incomplete and lacked crucial information, compromising the integrity of the evidence.
The court heard that Mubiru’s report did not include a critical exhibits and that his name did not appear in the report.
Mubiru informed trial Judge, Isaac Muwata that among the many exhibits he received for DNA analysis were also swabs of suspected blood collected from the scene of the crime in the couple’s master bedroom, shower room, door handles, and up on the ceiling of the house.
Furthermore, the samples were picked from a baton, a walking stick, and brain matter.
The Court also heard that samples of swabs from Molly Katanga’s right hand and the late Katanga’s left hand were also submitted for DNA testing.
Defence lawyers sought to have Mubiru’s testimony thrown out, citing his failure to record a police statement and the missing information in his DNA report.
Despite the prosecution’s assurance that Mubiru’s testimony was credible and the evidence presented was reliable, the defence team’s scrutiny of Mubiru’s expertise and procedures has raised doubts about the prosecution’s case.
Previously, defense lawyers grilled pathologist Dr. Richard Ambayo over allegations of leaking his report to the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) before presenting it in court.
During cross-examination, lawyers led by Elison Karuhanga accused Dr. Ambayo of sharing his postmortem report with an online blog and two UPDF soldiers, who used it to initiate an inquest into Katanga’s death.
Dr. Ambayo denied the allegations, insisting he did not share the report before its presentation in court.
Dr. Ambayo also retracted his earlier testimony, stating he does not know Martha Nkwanzi Katanga, one of the suspects, contradicting his previous statement that Martha helped him identify Katanga’s body before a forensic examination.
Defense lawyer Karuhanga questioned Dr. Ambayo’s credibility, suggesting he may have been biased by Investigating Officer Detective Sgt. Beteise.
The lawyers pointed out inconsistencies in Dr. Ambayo’s testimony, including his earlier statement that the entry wound was on the right side of the head, contradicting his postmortem report.
The defense team presented a photo of Katanga’s body showing lacerations on the left side of the head, which Dr. Ambayo maintained could be exit wounds.
The defense team argues that Dr. Ambayo is either incompetent or biased, leading him to conclude Katanga was shot on the right side.
Dr. Ambayo clarified that he confirmed the identification because the request came with the name, but cannot confirm that Martha Nkwanzi identified the body.
However, he previously stated that the body was identified by Nkwanzi in his presence.
The defense argues Martha was not present at the mortuary.
According to Police form 48A, the deceased allegedly shot himself after a domestic violence incident.
The defense team confronted Dr. Ambayo with a photo of Katanga’s body showing lacerations on the left side of the head, but he maintained that exit wounds can also have lacerations.
The case was adjourned to Wednesday for Mubiru to testify to his findings.