Criminal
Trial
MOYO
J: The
accused person faces a charge of murder, it being alleged that on the
night of 1 February 2014 and the morning of 2 February 2014, the
accused person allegedly assaulted the now deceased, namely Nobuhle
Moyo who was his customary law wife. The deceased died at Mpilo
Hospital on the morning of 2 February 2014.
The
state led viva
voce
evidence from Musa Zulu.
The
evidence of the other witness was admitted into the court record in
terms of Section 314 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act
[Chapter
9:07]. These
were Nhlalo Gumbo, Caroline Sibanda, Belina Msimanga, Decock Masuku,
Arnold Nyamayarwo and Doctor I. Jekenya.
The
documents exhibits were the state summary marked Exhibit 1, the
Defence outline marked Exhibit 2, the confirmed warned and cautioned
statement marked Exhibit 3 and the post mortem marked 4.
The
accused person gave evidence for the defence.
The
facts of the matter are largely common cause. The accused person and
his wife (the now deceased) were returning from a beer drink at
Pumula Beer garden at around 2100 hours when they had a
misunderstanding. Accused started hitting the deceased accusing her
of having a relationship with a certain man. Nhlalo Gumbo and Luke
Mpande who were also travelling the same way, then restrained the
accused person.
Accused
dragged his wife deceased and Nhlalo Gumbo was then hit by accused
with a stick when he tried to restrain deceased. He then retaliated
hitting accused with a fist on the face and accused fell down.
Nhlalo
Gumbo then proceeded to his room with the deceased, where they slept
together and had sexual intercourse, once.
The
accused person later woke up where he had fallen and went to report
the assault at Pumula Police Station. He later went to look for
deceased carrying an axe and a knobkerrie and found her sleeping in
Nhlalo Gumbo's bedroom.
He
was incensed by this, and accused struck Nhlalo Gumbo with an axe on
the shoulder and the witness fled into the bush. Nhlalo Gumbo heard
deceased screaming saying accused was killing her.
Musa
Zulu heard screams woke up to check and found accused holding a
knobkerrie and an axe dragging deceased, deceased broke loose and ran
towards a lit room but fell on the step. Accused followed deceased
and was about to struck her with an axe but the witness intervened
and said he would rather hit her with the axe. She asked the accused
person to hand over the axe and the knobkerrie to her which he did.
The
witness then left accused hitting deceased with booted feet and
dragging her out of the yard. She went to call the neighbourhood
watch members.
She
took about 2 hours as the trip was long because these members did not
stay at the same place so she had to go to one place after another.
When she came back with the members of the neighbourhood watch,
accused was still beating the deceased but now they were outside the
yard. She did tell this from screams and the sound of an assault.
They
then restrained accused from beating the deceased and carried her in
a wheelbarrow to R. Sinyoka School where they would meet an
ambulance. She saw from the ambulance lights bear on the deceased
that she was injured on the head and the cheek.
The
accused person in his defence outline, states that he used clenched
fists and booted fit but in his confirmed warned and cautioned
statement he says that he used open hands, a dry tree branch and a
fresh switch.
The
post mortem report gives a series of injuries numbered 1 – 8. The
post mortem report further states that the pale body means she lost a
lot of blood from the multiple wounds of the head (scalp and face)
from the axing. The report further says the right thigh bruise and
the right parietal and bilateral occupied wound could have been
caused by the handle of the axe or any rod like object.
This
court has to make a determination on what was used to assault the
deceased as it is the only issue upon which a finding should be made
as there are varying facts on it.
Firstly,
Nhlalo Gumbo whose evidence was admitted as contained in the state
summary says accused brought the axe and the knobkerrie, meaning the
accused's version that he only brought the knobkerrie and took axe
from the witness is not true.
The
accused person brought the said weapons with him.
Secondly,
it is significant that Nhlalo Gumbo also says when the accused
arrived, he struck this witness with an axe on the shoulder, the
witness fled and later heard deceased screaming saying the accused
was killing her.
Musa
Zulu also says she found accused carrying the knobkerrie and the axe
and that when accused was about to strike deceased with the axe the
witness intervened and stated that he would rather hit her. She then
took the weapons away from the accused.
The
accused admits that he was very angry on the date in question because
of the unbecoming conduct of Nhlalo Gumbo and the now deceased.
The
post mortem report gives a series of injuries and amongst these
injuries which are mainly wounds, the Doctor also chronicles about
four fractures. On the second mark of violence, there is an
underlying hair line occipital fracture, on the 6 mark of violence
there is a fracture of the left maxillary bone.
On
the 7th
mark of violence there are fractures of the nasal bridge and nasal
bridge fractures. On the 8th
mark of violence, there is a fracture of the upper jaw.
The
Doctor remarks that the multiple scalp and face wounds are from
axing. In other words the words are consistent with marks of an axe
consistent with any rod like object.
Now
this court's finding is that the axe was used on the deceased on
this the court finds for the following reasons.
Nhlalo
Gumbo saw accused wielding an axe and he in fact struck Nhlalo Gumbo
with it on the shoulder. Musa Zulu saw accused about to strike the
deceased with the axe and restrained him. The post mortem report has
found that the wounds on the scalp and the face are from the axing
meaning that from the Doctor view such wounds are consistent with the
use of an axe. The Doctor also finds that a rod like object was also
used in causing the other wounds.
We
accordingly find that the accused did use the axe on the deceased and
in so doing he acted wrongfully and unlawfully.
We
then move on to determine what the accused person is guilty of.
The
accused persons incensed by his wife's conduct beat her for a
period in excess of 2 hours, using firstly an axe, the booted feet,
clenched fists, a dry tree branch and a fresh switch.
We
say in excess of 2 hours because, Musa Zulu was away for about 2
hours while accused beat the deceased until when she came back with
the members of the neighbourhood watch and the accused had actually
started beating the deceased prior to Musa Zulu's intervention as
she was awoken by the deceased's screams meaning that the beating
started then.
It
was also Musa Zulu's evidence that at the time they came back and
intervened, the members of the neighbourhood watch tried to lift the
deceased and noted that she could no longer stand up.
This
shows the extent of the beating, she had been injured to the extent
that she could no longer stand up.
We
then look at the aspect of intention in murder cases.
In
this regard we refer to Professor G Feltoe's Guide
to the Criminal in Law Zimbabwe
2005 edition at page 96 wherein he stated as follows in relation to
actual intention:
“The
accused person desires death, death is his aim and object.”
He
further says “there will also be actual intention where death is
not the aim and object, but accused continues to engage in an
activity which he realises will almost certainly result in death.”
The
accused person assaulted deceased with an axe, booted feet, clenched
fists, a log and a fresh switch.
It
is also important to note that accused wore safety shoes on the day
in question.
The
continued assault of the nature the accused perpetrated on the
deceased, for a period extending beyond 2 hours, and the nature of
the injuries chronicled in the post mortem report, injuries some of
which were as long as 20cm and 1-15cm wide, as well as 4 fractures
can only lead us to the conclusion that, the accused person continued
to engage in an activity which he realised would almost certainly
result in death.
A
person with the multiple wounds of the sizes give in the post mortem
report, and the number of fractures stated therein would almost
certainly die from then.
It
was the state's submission that the accused person had legal
intention in his actions and therefore should be found guilty of
murder with actual intent.
This
court does not accept these submissions for the aforestated reasons.
Neither
does this court accept defence counsel's submissions that the
accused has negligence in his actions.
The
accused by conduct had the requisite intention as defined in the law
texts and other various authors.
We
accordingly find that in fact the accused person's conduct meets
the second leg of the too prolonged test regarding what actual
intention is.
We
accordingly find the accused person guilty of murder with actual
intent.
National
Prosecuting Authority,
applicant's legal practitioners