EMT, Hakuna evidence isiyokubaliwa mahakamani. Lakini kumbuka, kesi zinajengwa na strong "evidences" and not strong assumptions. The so called evidence provided by Msemakweli is neither forensic nor can it stand in a "product liability" case. Remember, EPA is a product liability case, the product being servicing of loans. You are mixing circumstantial evidence za criminal cases na civil law suits. In civil cases you have cases which can easily be decided using circumstantial forensic evidence but when it comes to intangible product like servicing of loans, if the circumstantial evidence suggests a possibility of innocence, the prosecution has the burden of disproving that possibility.
In our case here Mr. Msemakweli never ever would he agree to be the the prosecutor of the so called case as his "evidence" without doubt suggests a possibility of innocence from the word go. That is why he throws it to DPP, simply to avoid counter suits and considering all the hours he has put to look for the so called evidence to be wasted for nothing? No. Throw it to DPP and leak it to the media, and many would be fooled to praise him as he did something useful. Its simply bogus and he knows it.
Believe me or not, if the so called evidence was solid evidence, without any possibility of doubt, he wouldn't have missed the chance to open the case himself. Who wouldn't want to be his countries hero?