The appellant was charged with murdering his younger brother Felix Masarakufa on 10 August 2012 at Village Dzvaka, Chief Chireya, Midlands Province. The deceased, aged 28, operated a grinding mill and had recently sold cotton for US$1800, which he carried in two wallets. The appellant (aged 41) went to the deceased's homestead requesting help with making contour ridges at his field. When the deceased said he was unwell, the appellant prepared and gave him a herbal concoction. After the deceased felt better, they left for the appellant's field, with the appellant carrying various implements including a mattock, axe, shovel and w-bar. Upon arrival, the appellant struck the deceased on the head multiple times with the mattock, killing him instantly. He searched the deceased, took cash from his pocket, buried the body in a makeshift grave, covered it with thorn bushes, then fled to Harare with his wife. The body was discovered 10 days later. A postmortem revealed the cause of death as head injury, multiple skull fractures and blunt force trauma. In his warned and cautioned statement, the appellant admitted killing the deceased to rob him of his money.
The appeal was dismissed. The conviction for murder with actual intent and the death sentence imposed by the trial court were confirmed.
Murder committed in the course of robbery attracts the death sentence. The question of whether extenuating circumstances exist is essentially one for the trial court to decide, and an appellate court will not interfere with such a finding in the absence of misdirection or irregularity. Extenuating circumstances are any circumstances which reduce the moral blameworthiness of an accused person. A brutal, premeditated killing of an innocent person motivated by robbery does not constitute extenuating circumstances warranting a departure from the death sentence.
The court noted that the inference was "irresistible" that the appellant must have taken the deceased's money, even though he denied finding any money when he searched the deceased after death. The court described the concession by defense counsel that he could not fault the trial court's finding on extenuating circumstances as a concession that was "properly made."
This case reinforces the principle in Zimbabwean criminal law that murder committed in the course of robbery will attract the death sentence. It affirms the appellate court's approach of not interfering with trial court findings on extenuating circumstances absent misdirection or irregularity. The case demonstrates the high threshold required to establish extenuating circumstances in cases involving brutal premeditated killings motivated by robbery. It also illustrates the application of capital punishment for aggravated murder in Zimbabwe.