The State v Caroline Toringa

The accused, Caroline Toringa, was charged with the murder of 17-year-old Tafadzwa Tobias Dawanyi on 26 June 2015 at Mapfura Village, Nyanga. The deceased was the son of Loveness Mutsvairo, who was having an extramarital affair with the accused's husband, Lazarus Majagada. On the night of 25 June 2015, the accused went to Loveness's residence armed with an axe and bottle, seeking to confront her husband. After an initial confrontation where the accused was removed from the premises by her husband, she returned and began hurling insults at Loveness. The deceased came out armed with a stick to remove the accused from the premises. During the ensuing confrontation outside the gate, the accused stabbed the deceased three times with an Okapi knife, including a fatal 6 cm deep penetrating chest wound that extended to the heart. The deceased died from hypovolemic shock and penetrating chest trauma. The accused claimed she acted in self-defence after being attacked by both the deceased and his mother, and that she had wrestled the knife away from Loveness. The State's version was that the accused had come prepared for violence and was the aggressor.

• Whether the accused murdered the deceased with actual intent to kill
• Whether the accused acted in self-defence as contemplated in section 253 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act
• Whether the accused used excessive force in defending herself
• Whether the accused was the aggressor in the confrontation

The accused was found guilty of murder as defined in section 47(1)(a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.

An accused person who is the aggressor in a violent confrontation is not entitled to claim the defence of self-defence under section 253 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act. Where an accused arms herself and deliberately seeks out a confrontation with the intention of using violence, and then fatally stabs a third party who attempts to remove her from the premises, she cannot successfully invoke self-defence. The court will assess the credibility of a self-defence claim by examining objective factors such as the presence or absence of injuries consistent with the accused's version, the probability of the sequence of events as described, and evidence of premeditation and preparation for violence.

The court observed that this case represented a species of domestic violence which is unfortunately on the rise. The court noted that the husband, Majagada, contributed in large measure to the problems the accused believed Loveness was responsible for, as he sought her out and consorted with her whilst keeping the accused at home. The court commented that there was no justification, even assuming the deceased was about to assault the accused with a stick, to use such deadly force with a lethal weapon like an Okapi knife against a teenager who was merely trying to remove her from his home. The court also noted it was unwise for the deceased to engage the accused, given that his mother had warned him of the danger of confronting a scorned woman in the absence of the man of the house.

This case illustrates the Zimbabwean courts' approach to self-defence claims in murder cases, particularly in the context of domestic violence and marital disputes. It demonstrates the strict requirements for successfully invoking the statutory defence under section 253 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, and establishes that an aggressor cannot claim self-defence. The case also highlights the courts' treatment of premeditated violence arising from extramarital affairs as a form of domestic violence, and the principle that innocent third parties cannot be targeted to settle marital disputes. The judgment emphasizes that the courts will critically examine the credibility and probability of self-defence claims, particularly where the accused was armed and initiated the confrontation.