State v Dereck Chitakatira

### Preamble
1
HMT 65-19
CRB 43/19
---------


STATE

versus

DERECK CHITAKATIRA

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

MUZENDA J

MUTARE, 10 September, 11 September and 20 September 2019

Criminal Trial

ASSESORS:	1. Mrs Mawoneke

2. Mr Magorokosho

Mrs J Matsikidze, for the State

Ms J Magama with Ms E Ngorima, for the Accused

MUZENDA J: On 10 September 2019 the accused appeared before us facing the crime of Murder as defined in s 47 (1) (a) or (b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. The State alleged that on 8 March 2018 and at Mupudzi River Bridge, Buwerimwe Village, Chief Zimunya Mutare, the accused unlawfully caused the death of LLOYD CHITAKATIRA by causing him to drink water laced with a poisonous substance intending to kill Lloyd Chitakatira or realising that his conduct might cause death and continued to engage in that conduct despite the risk or possibility resulting in Lloyd Chitakatira’s death.

The accused pleaded not guilty. In his defence outline he stated that deceased was already suffering from stomach problems before the rituals. Accused performed the rituals as per the religious custom, he never laced the deceased’s water with any poisonous substance. Accused never had any altercation with the deceased. He was forced and threatened by Melania Pedzisai who claimed to have been told by the spirit that he should write the so called confession. The accused was traumatised to the extent that he even admitted to poisoning his father in his warned and cautioned statement. He stated that he never intended to kill his father nor did he have a motive to do so.

BACKGROUND

The accused aged 23 years and the deceased aged 40 at the time of his death were son and father respectively and resided at deceased’s homestead. They were both members of the Jeke Mission Church whose practices include among others periodical fasting. On 8 March 2018, the entire family embarked on fasting and around midday the family members completed fasting and proceeded to Mupudzi River for cleansing. The accused, as the eldest son and as per church’s customs, was to conduct the cleansing of the family members. At the river the accused cleansed the deceased and asked deceased to drink contents of the plastic bottle, which he had instructed deceased to bring from home. After the deceased drank the contents the bottle was thrown away.

On arrival at home around 1600 hours, the deceased started vomiting and complaining of stomach pains. On the morning of 9 March 2018 he was ferried to the clinic and died while being attended to by the hospital staff. A few days after the burial of the remains of the deceased, the accused went to seek spiritual assistance from a spiritual healer to whom he confessed in writing that he had killed his father. The confession led to the arrest of the accused and to the present charge of murder.

The question for decision by this court is whether accused poisoned his father.

EVIDENCE FOR THE STATE

At the commencement of trial the State and defence in terms of s 314 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07] agreed that the evidence of the following witnesses was not in dispute and the State would not call them to testify:

LETWIN MAVOYO who is a state registered nurse and stationed at Chitakatira Clinic. Her evidence is to the effect that on 9 March 2018 she was on duty when the deceased was brought in a wheelbarrow by the accused and his mother by the name Special Makunika. The witness observed that deceased could neither eat nor talk and froth was oozing through the mouth. She unsuccessfully attempted to resuscitate him and recommended that he be taken to Mutare General Hospital but died in the consultation room.

RUMBIDZAI JULIET CHITIMA is a Police detail stationed at Mutare Rural. On 9 March 2018 she received a report of a sudden death from Chitakatira Clinic. She attended the scene and observed froth coming out of the deceased’s mouth. Her efforts to refer the deceased’s body for post mortem examination were thwarted by the accused and his mother who cited religious beliefs.

PATRICIA MADZIVADONDO is a Police Inspector based at Mutare Rural. On 14 March 2018 she interviewed the accused and recorded a warned and cautioned statement which was later confirmed by a Magistrate.

JACOB CHIRWA is a Police detail based at Mutare Rural. He witnessed the recording of warned and cautioned statement of the accused. He also drew the sketch plan on the indications of the accused and the witnesses.

DR TSUNGAI JAVANGWE is a registered medical practitioner based at Parirenyatwa Hospital. On 29 March 2018 he is the one who did the autopsy of the deceased. He referred the kidneys, lungs, liver, intestines and brain specimen to the forensic laboratory.

SPECIAL MAKUNIKA accused’s mother was the first witness to be called for the State. She is aged 40 years and deceased was her husband. She belongs to the Jeke Mission Church and the entire family eventually grew up in that church. She told the court that on 8 March 2018, the fasting commenced at 0600 hours and was due to be completed at 1800 hours. After such fasting the family would go for cleansing at the river. However on that date she did not see what accused or deceased carried to the river. Whilst at the river, the accused cleansed the deceased. She did not see accused giving the deceased anything to drink. When she got back home she told the court that deceased complained of excruciating stomach pains, however according to her, deceased had had stomach problems before that day. Whenever deceased would experience such problems of stomach pain he would consult members of his church. She recalls feeding deceased with some porridge. On 9 March 2018 she decided, in consultation with the accused to take deceased to a clinic. Deceased’s condition had deteriorated. The condition of the deceased on 8 March 2018 and the morning of 9 March 2018 alarmed; the witness. When deceased died at the clinic she was present.

On 14 March 2018 she arrived at the scene where the Chitakatira family had gathered. She was informed of what the accused had confessed and she approached the accused to hear about his attitude, whether he had confessed to be responsible for the death of deceased. Accused answered in the affirmative. According to the witness, she strongly believed that some strong traditional force compelled her son, the accused; to cause the death of the father. However what confused her was that the relations of deceased and accused were cordial and did not perceive any clash between the two. The witness was generally reserved and in a stalemate more particularly in that she was very cautious not to mention evidence that implicated the accused.

MELANIA PEDZISAI was the second witness. She resides at Koswa Village, Burma Valley, Mutare. She did not know deceased during his lifetime but knows the accused only in connection with this case. On 14 March 2018 she was approached by the accused and Takemore Chitakatira. Accused needed assistance in the form of spiritual healing. Accused disclosed to the witness that the deceased kept appearing in his dreams asking accused why he had killed him. The witness then asked the accused to reduce his confession into writing and he did. The handwritten note led to the arrest of the accused by the headman’s messenger. She did not attend Chitakatira’s family gathering. She denied threatening the accused in any way and stated that the accused willingly and on his own wrote the first copy of the note and later amended its contents to include the name of the person where he got the poison. She was promised a beast if all went well. He also pointed out that after seeing the witness on the first day, 13 March 2018, upon his going back home, he experienced  a more vicious beating in his dreams caused by the deceased’s spirit. The witness further told the court that there was no basis upon which she could have influenced the deceased to make a confession about the death of a person she did not know. All the accused cherished was for the witness to stop forever the menace caused by the dead father’s spirit. She summoned Takemore Chitakatira, Vaida Chitakatira and fellow villagers so that they witness what the deceased resolved to reveal.

In addition to the written statement, accused had also made oral confession to the witness describing how he had caused the death of his father. When the headman’s messenger asked the accused whether he had written the statement, accused confirmed without restraint, accused wanted to get help from the spiritual healer and be freed from the spirit which was appearing in his dreams. The witness was very confident during testimony and consistent throughout. She did not exaggerate and even during cross-examination by the defence counsel she remained forthright and adamant. There was nothing for her to benefit from the arresting of the accused, she was afraid that if she was told about how someone had died and hide the information she was going to be punished too by the dead man’s spirit. She resolved to let the world know about what accused had done.

FORTUNATE GUDO used to stay with the accused at Chitakatira Village. Accused was her husband and deceased was her father in law. On 8 March 2018 she joined accused’s family to go to Mupudzi River for cleansing after the fasting. On that day deceased was in good health. When deceased went into the water accused instructed deceased to take with him a plastic container. Whilst in the water, accused dipped deceased and then instructed him to drink the contents of the bottle which had been prepared by the accused. The bottle was then dropped in the river and washed away.

At around 1600 hours on that day the deceased started vomiting and complaining of stomach pains during the night of 8 March deceased could not eat anything due to immense pain. On 9 March 2018, the condition of the deceased deteriorated and was then taken to the clinic where he subsequently died. On 14 March the witness got a report from Takemore Chitakatira to the effect that there was a family gathering. When she attended same accused confessed and confirmed what he had reduced into writing. Accused behaved strangely on that date and acted as if possessed, he told the gathering that he had poisoned his father because he had joined satanism cult, that he also desired to have the rural house and the car as his own property. According to this witness, accused was not forced to confess. She used to have cordial relations with the accused and left accused’s home because the accused’s mother advised her to go than to stay in a house whose owner had been killed by the witness’s husband. The contents partaken by the deceased were not consumed by the accused. The witness also vehemently told the court that the deceased did not have a recurrent stomach problem to the best of her knowledge. She did not observe anything sinister on the behaviour of the accused on the date of the family gathering.

The witness was extensively cross examined but she did not shake. She told a simple story at most in tandem with the evidence of the accused except where she alluded to the motive behind the killing of the deceased and Satanism. She no longer loves the accused but she does not see any reason to lie against him.

TAKEMORE CHITAKATIRA resides in Chitakatira Village, Chief Zimunya, Mutare. On 14 March 2018 accused approached him and told him that he had a headache and asked the witness if he knows a spiritual healer who could assist him. The witness told the accused about Melania Pedzisai. He confirmed that whilst at Melania Pedzisai’s homestead and during the presence Vaida Chitakatira, he saw accused with a piece of paper in his hands. When the note was read the witness told the court that the accused in that note was admitting being reasonable for the demise of his father. He was present at the family gathering when the accused freely and voluntarily admitted to causing the death of his father. The family gathering then resolved to report the matter to the police. The witness also confirmed the behaviour of the accused after the confession at the family gathering he acted as if spiritually possessed and as far as he was concerned no one threatened him leading to the confession.

VAIDA CHITAKATIRA resides at Lot 1 Mazonwe, Burma Valley, Mutare. Deceased was her brother and accused is her nephew. On 14 March 2018 she received a call from Melania Pedzisai inviting her to the latter’s home to witness what the accused was saying. Upon arrival at Melania’s homestead, she was given a cloth to wear and join Melania at her shrine. The accused did not know her. When the accused arrived at the shrine, the accused asked for assistance from Melania so that his father’s spirit will not haunt accused in the future. The witness was present when Melania gave the accused paper and pen to write his confession. Accused wrote the whole episode whilst the witness was seated besides him. She read the note and also revealed the course of the poison. Accused was never threatened by Melania, further members of the Chief’s messengers out of caution sought confirmation from the accused who did confirm writing the note. She was present at Chitakatira family gathering where the accused unreservedly repeated the confirmation. Even when his cousin brother Lameck Chitakatira took accused to task about the confession, the accused repeated the confirmation. He was not assaulted, nor threatened by anyone, no inducement was reposed on him he told the story he had become courageous to herald to the public. The witness also added that the accused fell into a trance after the confession though what he was talking about was inaudible to the gathering. When the family confronted him, he told them that he was hearing and seeing the voice of his satanic leader telling him that he will go to prison but the leader will assist him to be released.

The State then produced the following evidence which needs to be quoted in extenso for purposes of this judgment.

The confirmed warned and cautioned statement of the accused: exh 2 reads in the English version dated 15 March 2018:

“I admit the charge being levelled against me. I bought the rat killer in Mutare town from Tonderai Magada. I wanted to poison rats but that was not what I used if for. I put the poison in a plastic container which had some water and I gave my father so that he would drink it. I had the intention to kill my father Lloyd Chitakatira.”

The subject statement was confirmed at Mutare Magistrates’ court on 16 March 2018.

The original written confession written by the accused on 14 March 2018 at Melania Pedzisai’s homestead, exh 1A and 1B, was also admitted in court by consent of the accused, the English version reads:

“Father I am your son Dereck Chitakatira I wronged you. I gave you poisoned water that later killed you. I am now asking for forgiveness that you should not come back and haunt me or to the surviving ones or moving at night, or coming back home. I implore you to rest. I am appealing for forgiveness, forgive me as your son, father. I tried to sustain you but I failed, so may you forgive me. I am your son Dereck Chitakatira, I trust that you have forgiven me and you will not haunt the living and do not even haunt Tonde, who gave me this poison. I plead with you father. Do not even haunt Tonde Magada. Father I am pleading with you stop haunting me again even through my dreams. If ever, there is someone who will try to invoke your spirit to rise against us, please do not yield so that you may rest as you used to say that when you die you wanted to rest, do likewise. I implore you my father forgive me.”

The last document produced by consent of both parties is the post mortem report, exh 3. It is in-conclusive because by the time the matter proceeded to trial, no results had been obtained by the State from the forensic laboratory due to a lot of pending tests being experienced by the forensic scientists and there was no hope as to when it was going to be availed.

DEFENCE EVIDENCE

The accused testified. He is now 23 years old and he adopted the précis of his defence outline to his testimony. He told the court that on 8 March 2018 the entire household embarked on fasting. On that morning accused went up to Hwangira Mountain to pray. Upon his return, all the family proceeded for cleansing at Mupudzi River. That was between midday and 1pm. Fortunate Gudo, Brian, Special, Anesu, Naume, deceased, Brian’s wife and accused constituted the family that went to the river. At the river accused dipped himself and then later dipped the deceased. They held a closing prayer then left for their homestead. On the way home the deceased was driving but the car ran out of fuel. Accused went to buy fuel and upon his return he was asked by the deceased to drive because deceased was no longer feeling well. When they arrived home, deceased was in great pain and had to be assisted to get into the house. At a later stage the family decided to go and get assistance from Mrs Chitiyo, a faith healer. The condition of the deceased did not improve so they came back home. The deceased’s condition further deteriorated and on 9 March 2018 they took him to the clinic where he died before being treated. The accused refuted the allegations that he had killed his father. He was but forced by Melania Pedzisai. To the accused he was fooled by Melania. He disowned both the statement he wrote at Melania’s home as well as the confirmed warned and cautioned statement as being untrue.

On 14 March 2018 he was threatened by members of the family which drove him to falsely confess about being behind the death of the deceased. However he admitted compiling the manuscript exh 1A, he also admitted making an admission at the police station. Of great importance, the accused confirmed that what killed his father which caused him to froth, was a result of poison. Accused reiterated in court that he was close to his father and hence he had no motive to kill him. On 14 March 2018 at the family gathering when his mother asked him to confirm what he had told the gathering that he was responsible for his father’s death, he confirmed to her. During cross examination by the State he told the court that he had no defence to offer to the charge of killing his father by poisoning.

BRIAN CHITAKATIRA, accused’s young brother testified. He was at the river on the day in question and confirmed that there was a plastic container whose contents were given to the deceased by the accused to drink after the ritual at the river. Brian also drank the same after being given by the accused. He confirmed that the deceased fell terribly ill after the visit to Mupudzi River. He was complaining about a stomach complication. On 8 March 2018, they took the deceased to Chitiyo homestead for treatment but could not get meaningful help. The witness accompanied accused to Chitakatira Clinic on the morning of 9 March 2018 where the deceased died before being transferred to Mutare General Hospital. On 14 March 2018 at the Chitakatira family gathering Brian told the court that accused dissociated himself from anything dealing with the confession. The defence then closed its case.

The defence case was full of inconsistencies and contradictions more particularly when comparing the evidence of the accused and Brian, his defence witness. As  the accused’s mother did during  her testimony, Brian was protective of the accused, well that is natural in our view moreso when one is called as a defence witness and testify on behalf of a close person like accused.

What do we make of the facts before us?

THE LAW

Section 256 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07]

Section 256 (1) provides as follows:

“Any confession of the commission of an offence and any statement which is proved to have been freely and voluntarily made by an accused person without his having been unduly influenced thereto shall be admissible in evidence against such. Accused person is tendered by the prosecutor, whether such confession or statement was made before or after his arrest, or after committal and whether reduced into writing or not.”

Exhibits 1A and (1B, the English version) qualify under s 256 (1) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. The oral statements relating to the confession made by the accused at Melania Pedzisai as well as made by the accused at Chitakatira Village family meeting squarely come under the auspices of the cited section. We are satisfied that both incidences and exh 1A and 1B are admissible evidence. They were freely and voluntarily made by the accused without any undue influence. The detailed manner accused volunteered information contained in exh 1A shows that it was coming from deep down his heart not planted by Melania Pedzisai. Melania did not know what had transpired between the accused and the deceased, accused did. Although Melania was a spiritual healer, one cannot hold that she was in position of authority so as to exert pressure on the accused. In any case we are satisfied that it is accused who freely and voluntarily decided to write about the events that had led to the death of the deceased. His elected version tallies with other related evidence emerging from the state witnesses more particularly. Fortunate Gudo and Brian Chitakatira relating to the water contained in the plastic bottle although Brian deliberately tried to mislead the court by stating that he was given the same water but did not suffer anything as a result. The accused seems to deny that he instructed the deceased to partake of the contents, yet his own young brother the defence witness acknowledges that evidence. We reject accused’s allegation that he confessed because he was afraid of Melania Pedzisa, it is unlikely at all. In any case why would Melania exert pressure on the accused if indeed accused had promised her a beast?

Section 256 (2) of the criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, provides as follows:

“A confession or statement confirmed in terms of subsection (3) of S 113 shall be received in evidence before any court upon its mere production by the prosecutor without further proof.”

Exhibit No. 2. The confirmed warned and cautioned statement of the accused was produced by the consent of the accused. It virtually solidifies the confessions made by the accused before Melania Pedzisai and before the Chitakatira family. Both statements unreservedly indicate a consistent confession by the accused and we are satisfied that both are admissible and exhaustively narrate the events that caused the deceased’s death. Although there is no scientific confirmation from the science laboratory, the confessions are palpably clear that deceased died due to poisoning perpetrated by the accused on 8 March 2018.

In the matter of State v William En Andere it was held that

“In the reported decision of the courts, where it was required that reasons for the inferences drawn by expert witnesses should be given, this requirement was met relevant to the admissibility of the evidence, but rather to weight, which should be accorded to the evidence.”

(My emphasis)

Whilst a toxicology report was required to get a scientific evidence or an expert’s view, in our view it is not fatal to the state case as well capably enunciated by Georges JA (as he then was) in State v Munukwa

“… confirmation of a statement usually leads to the result that a finding if not a plea of guilty is well nigh inevitable.”

The nexus between the death of the deceased and the accused’s action is the accused’s own admission and confession to the means he used to cause the death of the accused. In this case the lacing of water poison which water accused deliberately instructed deceased to partake.

In S v Dube Ebrahim JA in the headnote held that:

“In terms of s 255 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, [Chapter 9:07] where there is evidence (other than that of a confession) that proves that the crime was committed, a court can convict an accused on the basis of his confession., even though there is no other evidence confirming the confession. Before convicting the accused however the court should satisfy that the confession was genuine. Cogent evidence of the genuineness of the confession can come from the accused mentioning facts which he could only have known if he had taken part in the crime.

In the present case there was evidence aliunde that the five murders to which the appellant confessed had been committed and the confession contained details which proved that they were genuine. Therefore the appellant had properly been convicted of five counts of murder.”

Further the learned Judge of Appeal went on:

“The approach which the court adopts is conveniently set out in the case of R v TAPUTSA AND OTHERS  the passage in the judgment of LEWIS JA READS as follows:

“The effect of S 301 (2) seems to be that, where there is evidence aliunde proving that the offence has actually been committed the court may satisfy itself of the genuineness of the confession by the accused that he committed it or took part in it from the nature of the confession itself where, however there is no evidence aliunde proving that the offence itself has been confirmed, the court must, in addition, go outside the confession and be satisfied that it is confirmed by other evidence. In the leading case of R v BLYTHE TINDALL JA delivering the judgment of the Full Bench of the Appellate Division, laid down the confirming evidence required by the Statute must be such as to corroborate the confession “in a material respect” although it need not directly implicate the accused in the offence and that the statutory requirement, in this regard was similar to that in respect of an accomplice as explained by SOLOMON ACJ in R v LAKATULA

In LAKATULA’s case it was said that there should be corroboration in some material respect in order that the jury may be satisfied that the accomplice is reliable witness upon whose evidence they may safely act.

Applying this tests to confession, it seems that the confirming evidence need not amount to evidence directly confirming that part of the confession in which the accused actually implicates himself in the commission of the offence, it need only be evidence which is sufficiently corroborative of a material part or parts of the confession to satisfy the court that it can safely rely on the confession in convicting the accused.”

The learned Judge of Appeal concluded

“Before I outline the aspects of evidence which lead me to the conclusion I make reference to the case of R v SAMBO where Beadle CJ said:

If the accused mentions in his confession the knowledge of which could only have come by being connected with the crime, the mentioning of such facts will of course, be most cogent evidence to show that the confession is genuine. But every accused may have been questioned by the police on these very facts, their mention still has considerable probative value. If an accused freely makes a long statement and all the known facts fit in their proper sequence into this statement, this may often be sufficient on which to base a conclusion that the confession is genuine, even if the police may previously have questioned the accused on the facts, because unless the police put the actual words of the statement into the accused’s mouth, if his only knowledge of the true facts has come from police questioning, he is hardly likely to present a coherent and convincing story into which all the known facts dovetail perfectly. A confession of such a type will often, therefore itself prove its genuineness.”

In S v Muyanga

“The law regarding circumstantial evidence is well settled. When a case rests upon circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy the following tests:

the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be cogently and firmly established;

these circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused;

the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and no one else; and

the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation by any other hypothesis than that of guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence.”

The following aspects arising from the uncontroverted evidence are to us common cause:

the accused initiated and managed the family fasting

it was him who immersed the deceased at Mupudzi River and opted to cleanse deceased by offering him some fluid that deceased alone partook, the  contents were per Brian Chitakatira’s and Fortune Gudo’s evidence contained in a plastic container.

the accused initiated the idea that the deceased be taken to the clinic.

the accused and his mother prevented a post mortem process when the deceased died.

it was the accused who embarked on a journey to seek the services of a faith healer to make sure the deceased’s spirit would not haunt him moreso when he would be asleep.

it was the accused who wrote down a detailed confession on what actually transpired which information would only be known by an insider privy to the events of 8 and 9 March 2018.

We are satisfied that the accused went through a very hard time which led him to look for a spiritual healer and in a bid to resolve the restlessness over the murder of his father he genuinely believed that if he confessed to Melania Pedzisai, and before the Chitakatira clan he would be at peace. Fortune Gudo, Melania Pedzisai and partly Brian Chitakatira the accused’s defence witness corroborated each other in material respects. Some substance sourced from the accused was given to the deceased to drink. Barely four hours later from the time had he drunk the deceased developed fatal stomach pains. All the gaps which needed to be explained on what and who caused the death of deceased came from none other than accused himself in a confession he made to the spiritual healer as well as to the police. In terms of s 273 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, which reads:

“Any court which is trying any person on a charge of an offence may convict him of any offence with which he is charged by reason of a confession or that offence proved to have been made by him although the confession is not confirmed by other evidence.

Provided that the offence has by competent evidence other than such confession been proved to have been actually committed.”

We are satisfied that on 8 March 2018, the accused unlawfully and intentionally caused the death of Lloyd Chitakatira by causing him to drink water laced with poisonous substance intending to kill Lloyd Chitakatira. In his confirmed, warned and cautioned statement produced before us the accused stated that he intended to kill his own father. The state has managed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly the accused is found guilty of murder with actual intent.

Sentence

In assessing sentence I will take into account the mitigating and aggravating features. The accused is the eldest son to the deceased who deliberately orchestrated a heinous plan to go and purchase poison and end his father’s life out of greed. He wanted deceased’s house and the motor vehicle. He appropriately took advantage of the deceased’s religious belief and cause the whole family to embark on fasting with the ulterior motive of getting an opportunity to kill his father in the name of cleansing. The deceased experienced an arduous stomach pain from 8 to 9 March 2018, could not sleep the whole night. He frothed showing physical signs of poisoning. Accused must have valued the sanctity of life and at the age deceased died, he still had a long way to go but accused prematurely terminated his life.

In accused’s favour out of spiritual intervention he experienced horrendous nightmares which eventually compelled him to confess. He had no chance in my view he participated to unravel a mystery in this heinous crime. He tried to assist the deceased by taking him to the clinic albeit belatedly, although selfishly thwarted deceased’s post-mortem citing religious beliefs. He cooperated with Melania Pedzisai, the prophetess as well as the police during the recording of the statement. All these assisted the court in resolving this matter and to a great extent. The court however does not lose sight to the fact that accused then tried to dissociate himself from those statements trying to shift blame to other innocent people.

Further to his advantage is that he is a youthful offender. Otherwise he would have been sentenced to capital punishment.

Given the cumulative effect of all the aspects and the time he had taken waiting for trial and its finalisation by the court, accused is sentenced as follows:

18 years imprisonment

National Prosecuting Authority, state’s legal practitioners

Legal Aid Directorate, accused’s legal practitioners