Justice at last as Makore killer is convicted

Fidelis Munyoro

Chief Court Reporter

THE killer of seven-year-old Tapiwa Makore Junior in Nyamutumbu village, Murehwa, on September 17, 2020, Tafadzwa Shamba, has been found guilty of murder while the boy’s uncle, Tapiwa Makore Senior, also faces jail for being an accomplice after he provided his house for the commission of the crime.

The High Court in Harare yesterday delivered judgment in the long running matter and the two will be sentenced on July 12 after the prosecution and defence have submitted their arguments in aggravation and mitigation.

The body of Tapiwa was found disfigured and cut into pieces, sending tremors and sparking far-reaching outrage throughout the nation. 

Shamba confessed to the gruesome murder and this was confirmed by a magistrate and accepted by the High Court.

He told the court that they killed the boy with the intention of selling his body parts to a witchdoctor for US$1 500.

Shamba and Makore Snr were placed on their defence in October last year after the court found there was overwhelming evidence linking them to the murder.

The other two accused Mr Moud Hunidzarira and Mr Thanks Makore were acquitted at the close of the State case after the prosecution withdrew charges against them for lack of incriminating evidence.

In the case of Shamba, he was convicted on the strength of the confession he made with this being supported by other evidence. He did not only confess to the murder but made indications which led to the recovery of the boy’s lower limbs dumped in a latrine.

Shamba also led police to the house where the boy had been detained. The police also recovered a container with illicit brew which Shamba had used to drug the boy and other paraphernalia used during and after the murder. His confession was ruled to be free and voluntary.

In his lengthy statement to the police, Shamba described in graphic detail how he kidnapped the boy. The confession was confirmed by a magistrate. All this taken cumulatively, with the rest of the evidence showing that the confession was not just a story, sealed Shamba’s fate

Based on this, Justice Mutevedzi found that the only escape avenue for Shamba would have been if the statement had been obtained through duress or other undue influence.

In this regard, the judge said the onus was thus shifted to Shamba to show that the confirmation process was flawed.

“He failed to discharge on a balance of probabilities the onus on him, that the confirmed warned cautioned statement was not made freely and voluntarily,” said Justice Mutevedzi.

“We have no apprehension that we are enjoined to find him guilty of this murder on the strength of the confession he made.” 

On Makore Snr, the judge ruled that the court could not use the confession by Shamba to convict him and also found the independent evidence relating to his direct participation in the murder tenuous.

The court had to rely on circumstantial evidence. After discounting Makore Snr’s direct participation in the murder for want of evidence, the court ruled that he was embroiled in its commission in more than one way.

Justice Mutevedzi said they found as a fact that when Shamba kidnapped the boy from the community gardens, he took him to Makore Snr’s house where he was detained from 3pm until about midnight.

Shamba locked the boy in the house and went to a beer party where Makore Snr was. Makore supplied the beer that was used to drug the boy to facilitate his murder, according to the uncontroverted evidence adduced during the trial.

The court also noted that the confession by Shamba resulted in police recovering black plastic bags similar to those which Shamba claimed to have used to carry the boy’s limbs after killing him. Police also recovered a small animal tail which Shamba confessed had been used in the ritual to dissuade the victim’s spirit from avenging his death.

Justice Mutevedzi said in this case, the circumstantial evidence could not prove the guilt of Makore Snr in satisfying the requirements of the crime of murder, but must simply prove that he supplied Shamba with implements and made his house available to Shamba for the commission of the crime.

Given the fact that from the circumstances of the case, the court did not see how and what other inference could be drawn from them except that Makore’s involvement was apparent.

It is a requirement of the law that there be a causal link between the accomplice’s conduct and the death, said Justice Mutevedzi, finding that Makore provided his house to facilitate the commission of the crime hence contributed to the murder of the boy.

In the final analysis, the court was satisfied that either Shamba and Makore Snr, in one way or another, left their bold and luminous foot prints across the crime scene.

“Surely, God did not see it fit to distribute the gift of intelligence evenly,” said Justice Mutevedzi. “The first accused (Shamba) is hoisted by his own petard which he created from the catastrophic error of judgment when he decided to confess in the ill-informed belief that he was getting even with the second accused (Makore Snr).”

 On his part, Makore Snr, the judge said, meaningfully aided and abetted the commission of the crime hence he could not escape liability as an accomplice.