The modern troglodyte: Conspiracy around Chilima’s death
By Chifundo Dennis Phiri
The act of burning elderly over witchcraft claims is a notion that most of us today detest when we think about the conduct of our ancestors.
With much education and exposure, we can pass judgment on those who made such irrational decisions and committed heinous acts.
When beloved prince had passed away, before any investigation conducted the ancient narrative was to look at his enemies and contestants to find the killer or probably just who is the witch among them. Who has murdered the future king?
For this narrative any person with a known disagreement, would qualify as the killer and was charged without investigation on the king’s death.
The bad relationship with the deceased was enough to prove that one was a witch or killer.
Therefore, the same notion applies to the moden world of political assassination as we analyse the death of our departed vice president Dr Saulos Klaus Chilima.
Since his death there has been too many theories, narratives of his untimely death.
Let’s look at this guide to see whether its justified to back up such accusations, narratives and theories.
As an enlightened mind there are steps to follow to deduce whether something is a crime on which someone has to hang or not.
There are two terms to figure out, these terms are: mens Rea (guilty mind) and Actus reus (guilty act), these two are simply fundamental concepts necessary for establishing criminal liability.
To establish whether a death is a crime, the first thing that must be proven is the actus reus of the alleged crime, which means showing that the death resulted from a voluntary act or omission that constitutes a criminal offense.
Let’s look the Story in context first:
Could it have been a plot?
To prove whether this could’ve been a plot or not, we must first examine the events of the day properly and those before them to see if there was anything out of the ordinary to base our questions on.
Was the plane in active use or staged to kill?
According to all accounts of the plane given by the Malawi Defence Force, the plane had carried the remains of Ralph Kasambara to Mzuzu and was working fine on the same day.
It had flown from Mzuzu to Lilongwe and successfully flew from Lilongwe to Mzuzu, only to be met with bad weather conditions that made it unable to land, and it met its bad fate on the return journey.
This account shows that the plane was capable of carrying out its duties properly, hence there is no foul play in the account of choosing the plane. The argument that the plane was faulty can only stand if anyone has it on record that the plane was in bad condition, and that should also be contradicted by precedence of this being an irregular act.
What happened for the plane to crash? Could it have been planned?
The records say the plane failed to land in Mzuzu where it was destined to go due to poor visibility, caused by fog. Hence the tower failed to guide the plane for landing. In the same regard, the pilot failed in all attempts to land the plane, choosing to go to the alternate airport, Kamuzu International Airport, which was never successful.
On this account, so far, nothing seems to be out of the ordinary. If there had to be a plot, then the plot must’ve included the creation of fog in Mzuzu, which I believe is beyond any man’s capabilities. Or it should’ve been activated when the plane failed to land in Mzuzu and was on its way back. Looking at the type of plane and how everything went, I doubt even the mighty Mossad, KGB, CIA, or SEALs could pull off a mission that big that quickly.
Hence, this puts a damper on all accusations that call this death a plot so far due to the odd eventuality that someone must’ve had the ability to create fog.
Why didn’t the plane burn?
Watching too many movies and believing that they are real can cause one to be dumb. Contrary to many movies where airplanes catch fire after crashing, they are not designed as tinderboxes. There are safety protocols that make it rare for a plane to burn after a crash, so the basis of why the plane did not burn if it had fuel is baseless and unfounded.
Was the search party late?
This is an airplane. The search started the minute it went missing. What we fail to see is that its location had to be determined first by towers of different airports, and that is not a five-minute task.
The president reported the matter to the nation four hours after the disappearance of the vice president while the search was already in progress, not when it was starting. This was not an easy task contrary to what movie fanatics like me could’ve thought; these tasks take time.
What we know so far
From the little knowledge we have of the events, nothing seems to point out of the ordinary. But we need more statements of all things that occurred that day and prior to be declassified so that we have closure.
What we have to look for
- Postmortem Results: Await detailed autopsy results to rule out any unusual causes of death.
- Cockpit Voice Recorder: Release relevant portions of the cockpit voice recordings to the public for transparency, even though this may invade the privacy of the officers in charge of the plane.
- Witness Statements: Collect and analyze statements from the first responders and others involved.
At the moment, we have no reason to accuse anyone of anything because there doesn’t seem to be any causation to suggest actus reus or, I should say again, guilty act.
Moving further to base the story on mens rea (guilty mind) would be too far-fetched and will rub people’s feathers because we are still yet to find anything that suggests a criminal act in this death.
The presence of enemies is nothing when the cause of death proves natural, and the absence of enemies is nothing when the death is unnatural.
So to the enlightened, we have no reason at the moment to believe that the death of our beloved was a plot. Hence, I will not waste your precious time exploring mens rea, or guilty mind.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are those of the author not necessarily of The Maravi Post or Editor
