Courtroom tension peaks as witness admits police form suggested Katanga suicide

The High court in Kampala on Monday resumed hearing the murder trial of Molly Katanga and four others, with testimony from a government analyst seen as crucial to the prosecution’s case.

Inside Courtroom 3, a subdued atmosphere hung over the proceedings as legal teams, journalists, and a small number of tightly vetted spectators leaned forward to catch every detail.

Outside, the usual bustle of the High court compound continued under bright sunshine, with prisoners queuing at neighbouring courtrooms and a heavy security presence surrounding the Katanga trial, a stark reminder of the case’s high profile. Molly Katanga, widow of the deceased Henry Katanga, followed proceedings via three television screens set up in the courtroom.

Her two daughters, Patricia Nkwanzi and Martha Kakwanzi, along with house helps George Amanyire and Charles Otai, stood together in the dock. All five face charges related to the fatal shooting of Henry Katanga in November 2023, a case that has commanded national attention for over a year.

The trial is being prosecuted by Somali Workhooli, assistant director of Public Prosecutions, alongside Jonathan Muwaganya and Ann Kizza from the Office of the Chief State Attorney.

Mwesigwa Rukutana appears on a watching brief for the complainants. The accused are represented by senior advocates Elison Karuhanga, Macdusman Kabega, Peter Kabatsi and John Jet Tumwebaze. The matter is before Justice Rosette Comfort Kania, Comfort, presiding over the Criminal Division.

A year of legal proceedings 

The prosecution alleges that on November 2, 2023, Molly Katanga fatally shot her husband during a violent domestic altercation at their residence. According to the state, the killing was not spontaneous but, rather, a calculated and deliberate act.

The defence, in contrast, maintains that Henry Katanga’s death was the result of an unfortunate domestic dispute, not premeditation. The case has faced numerous delays, including changes in judicial officers and contested applications, contributing to the slow pace of proceedings.

Nevertheless, the trial progressed this week with the testimony of the prosecution’s 13th witness—a government analyst tasked with examining postmortem samples from the deceased.

FORENSIC EVIDENCE IN FOCUS 

The testimony of the government analyst is seen as central to the prosecution’s efforts to rebut the defence’s suggestion of suicide. Through forensic analysis of the postmortem samples, the prosecution aims to establish that Henry Katanga died not by his own hand, but through the intentional actions of others.

As the trial continues, the testimony of expert witnesses is expected to play a critical role in shaping the outcome, with both sides seeking to convince the court on the contested facts of the case

GOVERNMENT ANALYST TESTIFIES GOVERNMENT 

Resty Alexandra Naziwa, 36, a forensic toxicologist at the Government Analytical Laboratory, appeared as the 13th prosecution witness. She recounted how on November 2, 2023, police submitted postmortem samples through Police Form 17A (PF17A).

The exhibits included stomach contents (T1), a section of the kidney (T2A), a section of the liver (T2B), bile (T3), blood (T4), urine (T5), and vitreous humour (T6). Each sample was sealed in plastic containers and placed in a tamper-proof plastic bag.

The analyst detailed that the forensic procedures followed after receipt of the samples. All exhibits were catalogued, labelled with unique identifiers, and preserved at minus four degrees Celsius to prevent contamination.

Naziwa explained that the samples were subjected to gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS) testing, a standard technique used to detect the presence of drugs, poisons and other chemical substances. She testified that following a seven-day analysis, she compiled a report that was reviewed and approved before being tendered into evidence without objection from the defence.

FORENSIC FINDINGS

Presenting her findings, Naziwa told the court that no traces of poison or drugs were detected in any of the samples analysed. She explained that initial tests sought to detect common poisons such as pesticides, phosphorus compounds, rat poison, alcohol (through reducing sugar tests), and metallic poisons like mercury and arsenic.

All tests returned negative results. Further toxicological screening of the urine sample also returned negative for substances including amphetamines, methamphetamines, MDMA (ecstasy), cannabis, cocaine, heroin, morphine, benzodiazepines, and other opioids.

The results, Naziwa said, ruled out the possibility that the deceased, Henry Katanga, had been poisoned or drugged prior to his death. This supported the prosecution’s theory that his death resulted solely from physical trauma caused by gunshot wounds.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY DEFENCE 

During cross-examination, senior defence lawyer Macdusman Kabega sought to challenge the neutrality of the witness’s findings. Kabega questioned whether Naziwa was aware, when analysing the exhibits, that police had already indicated the nature of the case in PF17A.

The witness initially denied this, but later acknowledged, under questioning, that the police form stated the deceased had died from gunshot wounds sustained after an alleged domestic wrangle.

Kabega: “I want to suggest that the police indicated to you the nature of the offence and what the allegation was. Correct?”

Witness: “Yes, that is correct.”

Kabega: “Now, I would like you to look at Police Exhibit 39.” (A document was handed to the witness.)

“Can you read to the court what is written under the section titled ‘Nature of the Crime’?”

At this point, the prosecution rose to object, arguing that whatever was indicated under that section was outside the witness’s jurisdiction, as it had been filled out by the police when submitting the form.

Kabega proceeded: “It is alleged that the deceased shot himself after a domestic wrangle, and at postmortem, the cause of death was recorded as gunshot injuries. Correct? So, it is indicated that the deceased shot himself.”

Witness: “Yes.”

Kabega: (pressing further) “With a gun?”

Witness: (examining the document, appearing visibly uncomfortable) “Gunshot wounds.” Kabega: “Are you a police officer?”

Witness: “No.”

Kabega: “What causes gunshot wounds?”

Witness: (after a brief hesitation) “A gun.”

Kabega: “So, according to the police form, the deceased shot himself?”

Witness: “Yes, that’s true.” Kabega then concluded his line of cross-examination. Following the cross-examination, the witness was discharged.

COURTROOM ATMOSPHERE 

Throughout the proceedings, Molly Katanga appeared calm and composed, watching attentively from her seat. Her two daughters, Patricia Nkwanzi and Martha Kakwanzi, along with house helps George Amanyire and Charles Otai, also maintained a subdued presence in the dock.

The courtroom remained under tight security, with officers controlling access and monitoring movement closely—a reflection of the public and media interest that continues to surround the high-profile case.

The trial, presided over by Justice Kania, continues, with further prosecution witnesses expected to testify in the coming days.

LEGAL IMPLICATION OF ANALYST’S TESTIMONY 

The testimony of the government analyst has introduced significant implications for the ongoing trial of Molly Katanga and her co-accused.

While the absence of toxic substances in the deceased’s system bolsters the prosecution’s theory of a premeditated killing, the defence is expected to continue pressing the argument that the lack of physical signs of struggle could suggest a lack of criminal intent.

The next stages of the trial are anticipated to focus on further expert testimony, particularly concerning the gunshot wound sustained by the deceased and the forensic evidence collected at the scene.

The defence is likely to emphasise the possibility of an accidental shooting, whereas the prosecution will maintain its stance that the crime was deliberate and executed with calculated intent.

In the coming weeks, the court will hear testimony from additional witnesses, including police officers, forensic experts, and potentially individuals who were present at or near the time of the incident. Each account is expected to add complexity to an already contentious and high-profile case.

THE ROAD AHEAD: JUSTICE OR TRAGEDY?

Legal observers note that while the forensic findings strengthen the state’s case, they may not, in isolation, be sufficient to secure a conviction. The prosecution faces the challenge of directly linking Molly Katanga to the fatal gunshot.

In the absence of an eyewitness account, the state will rely heavily on forensic interpretations, circumstantial evidence, and the credibility of its remaining witnesses. Beyond the courtroom, the Katanga case has generated broader public discourse surrounding themes of family conflict, privilege and the administration of justice within Uganda’s elite circles.

Supporters of Molly Katanga portray her as a victim of tragic domestic circumstances, whereas critics insist that accountability must prevail, irrespective of social status. Now in its second year, the trial is inching towards a critical phase.

The central question remains: what exactly transpired on the night of November 2, 2023, at the Katanga residence in Mbuya? Was it a tragic accident or a premeditated act of murder? Each day in Courtroom 3 brings new evidence, new questions and heightened public interest. The trial is set to continue on May 6.

ashleymwesigye@gmail.com

Related