Teacher killer guilty of murder
Lebogang Mosikare | Thursday August 19, 2021 21:55
The curtain finally closed for Nthoiwa Maxala who was convicted of murdering Thuso Duncan Mulaladzi, a former Physics teacher at Tutume Mc Connell. Mulaladzi was gunned down on September 13, 2015 in Somerset Extension in Francistown.
The pathologist who examined Mulaladzi’s corpse found that she had an entry bullet wound on the chest.
Justice Matlhogonolo Phuthego also said the pathologist report, which was accepted as evidence by the prosecution and defence, showed that six bullet pellets were removed from Mululadzi’s corpse which indicates that a high velocity object like a gun was used to inflict injuries on the deceased from a short distance.
When deciding whether there was malice aforethought in the matter, Justice Phuthego said the accused told the court that on that fateful day, he had fought with the deceased and his companions in Borolong and thereafter went to his place of residence to get his short gun after they assaulted him.
The accused, Justice Phuthego said, the accused returned to Masa Shoto’s place where the fighting took place only to find that the deceased and his companions had gone to Francistown.
“I find that the accused came to Francistown to look for his assailants obviously to teach them a lesson. Evidence in the record shows that the accused is the licensed gun owner of the gun that was used to kill the deceased. The inference I draw is that he was holding a lethal weapon and wanted to cause grievous bodily harm to his assailants. After the accused saw the deceased and his companions at Nzano Mall fuelling their car, he followed them with his car and they fled. The accused later caught up with the deceased and his companions in Somerset Extension,” said Phuthego.
A bullet that was fired from the accused’s gun, Phuthego noted, killed the deceased.
“I therefore find that the state has proved that the accused has murdered the deceased with malice aforethought. The accused said that he shot Mulaladzi accidentally while trying to duck Mulaladzi from hitting him with softball bat. The accused said that prior to the shooting, Mulaladzi had insulted his mother, a factor that provoked him. The first prosecution witness testified to the effect that after Maxala and his companions cornered them into a yard in Somerset Extension, he disembarked from his car and asked them if they could see what he was holding,” Phuthego stated.
The judge then stated that he found the position adopted by the accused that the gun fired accidentally when he tried to duck Mulaladzi from hitting him with a softball bat as an afterthought that did not hold any iota of truth.
“The assertion by the first prosecution witness that when Maxala disembarked from his car and asked them (deceased and his companions) if they could see what he was holding was uncontroverted by the defence when the witness gave his testimony in court. I therefore make an inference that the state managed to rebut self-defence in this matter beyond reasonable doubt. It is the accused’s evidence that the deceased and his companions ran away after he located them at Nzano Mall. If the assertion of the accused was to be believed, the deceased and his companions were carrying light weapons while the accused was carrying a rifle,” Phuthego went on...
The law allows the accused to be charged with a lesser charge of manslaughter if it can be demonstrated that he was indeed provoked.
“In my judgment, the accused had sufficient time to cool off if ever he was provoked by the deceased by assaulting and insulting his parents. According to his version, he went home after he was assaulted, went to Savemor Bar in Borolong to drink alcohol, came to Francistown where he also said he bought some beer at the bars in Satellite location before he finally managed to locate the deceased and his companions at Nzano Mall. It therefore cannot be said that the accused acted on the spur of the moment when he shot the deceased looking at the pattern of events before the deceased was shot,” the judge elaborated.
Justice Phuthego concluded: “According to the evidence of the accused, he used a firearm to kill the deceased. I find this not to be proportionate to the assault and insults he received from the deceased... It is my finding that provocation is also not available to the accused as self-defence... I make a conclusion that the state has proved the essential elements of murder beyond reasonable doubt and subsequently find the accused guilty of murder.”