Kabelo Masoabi
HIGH Court Acting Judge, ’Manapo Motebele, has sentenced Moruti Mapola, a farmer from Mokhotlong, to 30 years’ imprisonment for the murder of his former friend and fellow villager, Tšeliso Chabalala.
Mr Chabalala, 34 at the time of his death, was killed on 24 November 2017 following a fatal knife fight arising from allegations of marital infidelity. The court heard that Mr Chabalala had repeatedly accused Mapola of having a romantic relationship with his wife.
Mapola, who was 32 at the time of the offence, was charged with murder in contravention of Section 40(1) of the Penal Code Act No. 6 of 2010, read with Section 40(2). He pleaded not guilty.
Justice Motebele found Mapola guilty of murder without direct intent, holding that although he caused Mr Chabalala’s death, the killing occurred during a violent confrontation and was not premeditated.
The fatal confrontation
The court heard that the incident occurred at Kholokoe village, Mokhotlong, after relations between the two men deteriorated over Mr Chabalala’s allegations that Mapola was having an adulterous affair with his wife.
State witness Makoena Masauli testified that she was walking towards her village when she came across the two men fighting.
“Upon arrival at the scene I saw the accused mounted on top of the deceased. I saw the accused repeatedly throwing fists at the deceased and also saw shiny objects moving up and down in the accused’s hands,” she told the court.
Ms Masauli said Mapola got up and fled on his donkey after noticing her approaching. She testified that she knew both men and called out to Mr Chabalala by name, but he did not respond.
When she approached him, she observed three stab wounds and intestines protruding from his lower ribs. She said she did not see a weapon near the deceased before rushing to the village to report the incident.
A post-mortem report tendered in evidence confirmed that Mr Chabalala had sustained 14 stab wounds and died as a result of the injuries.
Self-defence rejected
Giving evidence in his defence, Mapola claimed that he was riding a donkey while carrying a bag of maize meal when Mr Chabalala approached him from behind and stabbed him with a knife.
He alleged that when he turned to face Mr Chabalala, the deceased stabbed him a second time in the chest. Mapola denied initiating the attack and maintained that he had acted in self-defence.
Justice Motebele rejected this version, finding it improbable.
The court held that the eyewitness testimony, together with the nature and extent of the deceased’s injuries, supported the State’s case that Mapola had mounted Mr Chabalala and repeatedly stabbed him during the confrontation.
The judge found that Mapola could have averted the fatal outcome after overpowering Mr Chabalala but instead continued stabbing him repeatedly in vital areas.
By that stage, the court found, Mr Chabalala was on the ground, disarmed and no longer posed an imminent threat.
Justice Motebele further noted that Mapola left the scene without rendering or seeking medical assistance for the injured man.
In the court’s view, his conduct demonstrated dolus eventualis—that he foresaw death as a possible consequence of his actions and reconciled himself with that possibility.
Right to life
In aggravation of sentence, the prosecution submitted that murder is the gravest violation of criminal law because it infringes the fundamental right to life guaranteed under Section 5 of the Constitution of Lesotho.
The prosecution argued that Mr Chabalala’s life had been taken in a brutal, barbaric and callous manner and that the courts have a duty to safeguard the right to life through sentences that reflect the seriousness of such offences.
“The evidence revealed that the accused’s attack was unprovoked and so brutal. He stabbed the deceased multiple times, from the head to the knees, thereby making his actions appear barbaric and callous. The seriousness of the murder outweighs the accused’s personal circumstances.
“We submit, therefore, that the enormity of the accused’s offence of murder should inevitably attract a serious punishment and a sentence reflecting society’s condemnation of the unlawful taking of human life,” the prosecution submitted.
Justice Motebele agreed that the circumstances of the offence warranted a severe sentence.
Although the stabbing was spontaneous rather than premeditated, the judge held that Mapola, who was 32 at the time, was a mature adult expected to possess sufficient life experience, emotional restraint and judgment to resolve conflict through lawful means.
Rather than exercising restraint, the court found, he chose to take the law into his own hands, with fatal consequences.
Age not an extenuating circumstance
The defence argued that extenuating circumstances were present, emphasising that the confrontation was spontaneous and emotionally charged rather than planned or premeditated.
Defence counsel, Advocate Selepe, also submitted that Mapola’s age—32 at the time of the offence—should be considered when assessing his maturity and culpability.
The court rejected the argument.
“The court is not persuaded that the accused’s age constitutes extenuating circumstances. He was a mature adult whose judgment and appreciation of the consequences of his conduct could not possibly be said to have been diminished by his age,” Justice Motebele held.
The court ultimately sentenced Mapola to 30 years’ imprisonment for murder.
