The Independent Uganda: You get the Truth we Pay the Price
British Forensic Expert tells Justice Rosette Comfort Kania: Even under perfect conditions, the DNA results cannot tell court as to who fired the killer gun
SPECIAL REPORT | ANTHONY NATIF | As recorded in court, in the case Uganda Vs Molly Katanga and adapted from @TonyNatif on X.
****
During cross-examination earlier today, the forensic expert, DW4, unequivocally told the presiding judge in the Katanga case that even if one were to ignore the numerous failures, contaminations, etc. that she pointed out in the DNA evidence gathering and analysis process, the results would still not tell the court as to who fired the gun that ended Henry Katanga’s life.
This was during a cross-examination led by the assistant DPP and head of the Department of Gender, Children and Sexual Offences, Samali Wakooli.
SW: You also told the court that it is difficult to tell the sequence in which DNA is deposited on an item. Is that true?
DW4: It’s impossible to tell
SW: You told court that the propositions you make in your report (on page 28) are activity level propositions…
DW4:: Correct
SW: To do an activity level proposition for Miss DW4, one must be in a position to interrogate all intervening factors that would have led to a particular activity. Not so?
DW4: No
SW: Would you make an assumption…
DW4: Assumptions are made in every single case
SW: …(assumptions) of what could have happened, what could not have happened…
DW4: There are assumptions and evidence of very poor laboratory practice and yes, the final findings in this case were based on the assumption that everything was clean and there were no problems, and even then, the DNA findings did not help.
UgandaVsMollyKatanga
Even under perfect conditions, the DNA results cannot tell court as to who fired the killer gun: British Forensic Expert tells Justice Rosette Comfort Kania.
During cross examination earlier today, the Forensic Expert, DW4, unequivocally told the presiding… https://t.co/QNdfEgCzPb pic.twitter.com/uXH9o8tIIN
— Anthony Natif (@TonyNatif) July 16, 2026
SW: You made assumptions, and even when you did your case review, you also did assumptions, right?
DW4: Every single case has assumptions in it because we never ever know the true reality of a case.
SW: In fact most of your opinions are based on assumptions. Is that correct?
DW4: My final opinion in my report is based on…whilst the observations I’ve highlighted…opportunities of DNA transfer, my final opinion is even if absolutely everything I’ve raised didn’t happen, the laboratory was clean, there was no contamination, the findings still do not help address who fired that weapon.
SW: That’s okay
Justice Kania: You concluded by saying the results still do not…help?
DW4: …help address who fired that weapon. The DNA cannot address that question
SW exhales deeply and then says, “Okay, let’s take an interpretation.”
She then sits back with a bit of a thud and starts whispering to Chief State Attorney Jonathan Muwaganya, who holds his lower cheek and shakes his head while seemingly perusing some documents.
DW4 sipped on her water.
Note: In the indictment and in their submissions on the case to answer, the DPP argued that they had DNA evidence linking Mrs Katanga to the killer weapon, and in their submissions convincing Justice Kania that Mrs Katanga had a case to answer, they submitted that “the prevalence of A1’s DNA on the magazine, pistol barrel, the trigger and trigger house points to the fact that A1 operated the gun and killed the deceased.” Justice Kania agreed with them. (See frame 2)
Today, the witness reminded the learned trial judge that DNA evidence cannot prove who fired that killer gun.
Cross-examination continues early Monday morning and re-examination soon after.
