The State v Tatenda Magodhi

On 2 July 2017 at Bhunu Bar, Makushaa, Shurugwi, the accused (aged 19) stabbed the deceased Matron Isheunesu Makotore (aged 24) in the abdomen with a homemade knife (41cm long). The stabbing arose from a dispute over a Nokia cellphone which the deceased had given to a woman named Hazel while they were in a relationship. After their relationship ended, Hazel married the accused. The deceased attempted to retrieve his phone from the accused without success. During the confrontation at the bar, the accused drew a homemade knife and stabbed the deceased once on the left side of the abdomen, exposing his intestines. The deceased was taken to Shurugwi Hospital and transferred to Gweru Provincial Hospital where he died from his injuries. The pathologist attributed death to bronchoaspiration, haemorrhagic shock, and penetrating abdominal wound due to assault.

• Whether the accused murdered the deceased
• Whether the defence of self-defence under section 253 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act was available to the accused
• Whether the accused acted with actual or constructive intention to kill
• Whether the means used to avert the alleged attack were reasonable in the circumstances
• The appropriate sentence for murder with constructive intent committed by a young first offender

The accused was found guilty of murder with constructive intent and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.

For the defence of self-defence under section 253 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act to succeed, all requirements must be satisfied including that the means used to avert an unlawful attack must be reasonable and proportionate in all the circumstances. Where an accused uses a large and dangerous knife to stab a victim in the abdomen causing severe injuries and death in response to an assault by fists and throttling, the means used are disproportionate and unreasonable, and the defence of self-defence fails. An accused's false and conflicting versions regarding material issues can amount to corroboration of state evidence under the principles in S v Mhlanga 1987 (1) ZLR 70. A court may convict on the evidence of a single competent and credible witness under section 269 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act where the evidence is satisfactory in every material respect.

The court observed that the case "exposes the violent nature of our society" and expressed concern about young offenders engaged in mining activities who have developed a violent culture, moving around with lethal weapons such as machetes, knives and axes and being ready to use them on the slightest provocation. The court noted that while young first offenders should be treated with leniency and given a chance for rehabilitation, where a young offender displays violent conduct and commits murder showing readiness to confront persons older than himself, his youthfulness should provide less mitigation than for an ordinary youth who acts irrationally due to immaturity. The court emphasized that courts will not condone violence, especially the use of machetes, knives and similar weapons, and that lengthy custodial sentences are necessary to send a clear message, while not completely breaking the accused.

This case illustrates the application of the codified defence of self-defence under section 253 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act in Zimbabwe, particularly the requirement that all subsections (a) to (d) must be satisfied for the defence to succeed. The case demonstrates judicial concern about violent conduct among young artisanal miners who carry lethal weapons and use them on slight provocation. It affirms the principle that courts can convict on single witness testimony under section 269 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act where the witness is competent and credible. The case also addresses sentencing considerations for young first offenders who commit murder with constructive intent, balancing rehabilitation prospects with the need to denounce violent conduct and weapon use.