State aims to appeal against trainee doctor’s hospital rape acquittal

The state wants to appeal against the High Court judgement in which trainee medical doctor Dennis Noa’s conviction on a charge of rape was overturned in November last year.

A ruling on the state’s application to be allowed to appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgement in which Noa’s conviction was overturned is due to be delivered by judges Herman January and Philanda Christiaan on 27 February.

The two judges heard oral arguments on the state’s application for leave to appeal in the Windhoek High Court on Thursday.

Noa was accused of raping an 18-year-old patient at Katutura Intermediate Hospital in Windhoek, where he was working as a medical intern, on 11 April 2021.

The patient was being treated in a head injury ward after a road accident that had left him unconscious and immobile.

Noa denied guilt on a charge of rape when he stood trial in the Windhoek Regional Court.

He was found guilty in January last year, and in February was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment.

Noa successfully appealed against his conviction after he was found guilty and sent to prison.

In a judgement delivered in November last year, January found that the version Noa gave during his trial “is not fanciful and farfetched to simply be rejected as false beyond reasonable doubt”.

During his trial, Noa told the court he handed the patient to a hospital porter and that he was not with the patient for between 30 and 45 minutes before the patient’s return to his ward.

In written arguments filed at the High Court, state advocate Palmer Kumalo argues that “the totality of the evidence proved the guilt of [Noa] beyond a reasonable doubt”.

The case against Noa was based on circumstantial evidence, and that evidence proved Noa’s guilt, Kumalo argues.

“The state proved that [Noa] is the only person who was with the victim during the period in question. There can thus be no doubt that if the victim was sexually abused it could only be [Noa] who did so,” according to Kumalo.

He also argues that the two judges who heard Noa’s appeal misdirected themselves and that the state has reasonable prospects of success with an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Also in written arguments filed at the court, Noa’s lawyer, Sisa Namandje, argues there was no proof beyond reasonable doubt that a sexual act was committed with the patient or that Noa was the only person who had an opportunity to commit such an act.

Namandje argues that the state does not have reasonable prospects of success with an appeal against the High Court’s judgement, and is asking the court to
dismiss the application for leave to appeal.