Nkosentsha Khumalo
Bulawayo’s capacity for jaw dropping crime stories continues to astonish, as yet another horrific case of an elderly man preying on young girls has emerged.
In a recent judgment, a 58 year old grandfather was sentenced to 60 years in prison for the repeated rape of his two granddaughters, a crime so reprehensible it would make anyone’s blood boil.
This comes on the heels of a serious case, also in Bulawayo, were this tabloit published that a 60 year old divorcee was imprisoned for raping his tenant’s underage daughters.
Recently, a 58 year old married man, was found guilty of nine counts of rape after a contested trial.
The victims, two juveniles aged 11 and 9 years, reportedly suffered unimaginably traumatic experiences at the hands of their grandfather. But what makes this story even more bizarre is the grandfather’s attempt to justify his actions by claiming that he intended to marry one of his granddaughters.
The case against the perpetrator was brought to the Bulawayo Magistrate’s Court after his granddaughters bravely reported the abuse to their mother, who then alerted the authorities.
The trial was emotionally draining, as both girls had to relive their trauma and provide testimony against their grandfather. The evidence against the accused was overwhelming, and the court rejected his claim that he intended to marry one of his granddaughters.
This was heard by a Bulawayo Regional magistrate S. Mkandla when the 58 year old man was arraigned before him facing 9 counts of rape.
From the charge sheet which forms part of the record, the state alleged that he on those nine occasions had sexual intercourse with his two granddaughters both under the ages of 12 and who at law are deemed incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse.
The accused person denied the allegations levelled against him. He in his defence outline told the court that the children were never left in his custody hence he did not have access to them.
He further averred that the allegations were fabricated as his wife refused the request by the 9 year old juvenile’s mother to take care of his homestead. He thus protested his innocence.
The state case stood on the evidence of four witnesses and so did the defence case. From both the state and the defence it is evident that there are issues which are common cause. Common cause facts are that both complainants visited the accused person’s rural home in January and April 2024.
During those visits, the accused was present at the rural home. Thirdly the complainant and the accused would go together to herd cattle..
Lastly there is evidence of sexual penetration on both complainants as evidenced by the medical affidavits filed of record as Exhibit 1 for the first complainant, the 11 year old and Exhibit 3 for the 9 year old.
For determination by the court is if it is the accused or some other person who sexually violated the complainants.
The first 11 year old complainant testified and told the court that she asked for permission to accompany the accused to the grazing fields.
It was when they were on their way and at naJeffery’s fields that the accused plucked out branches from some trees, spread them on the ground and ordered her to lie down. She refused and the accused threatened her after which she complied.
State revelations are that the accused proceeded to lower his trousers to knee level, undressed and inserted his urinating organ into hers. When she advised him that it was painful he reassured her that she was going to heal.
This was the first incident and after that they proceeded to look for cattle.
The Court heard that on the following day, they again went to look for cattle and this time they were in the company of the second 9 year old complainant.
When they got to
a neighbour’s fields, the accused person reportedly plucked out branches, spread them on the ground, ordered the 9 year old juvenile to lie down after which he had sexual intercourse with her in her full view.
When he was done with the juvenile, he indicated that it was now his 11 year old granddaughter’s turn and he proceeded to have sexual intercourse with her while the 9 year old was watching.
This according to the Court he did again the following day when they were at the mountain and on a later day when they were in the kitchen and the bedroom.
The 11 year old complainant went on to tell the court that after one of the sexual encounters, her grandfather told her that she was sweet, hence she was to be his wife and they were to have children. He also promised to buy her make-up and high heeled shoes.
Nothing significant came out of her cross examination, hence she maintained her version on what she had told the court in her evidence in chief.
The 9 year old’s evidence is in material respects corroborated to that of the first complainant. She told the court that on the day she went with her grandfather and first complainant to herd cattle after they had crossed a stream, the grandfather plucked branches from a tree, spread them on the ground and ordered her to lie down.
He undressed, took out his urinating worm which he inserted into her vagina. She told the accused that it was painful but the accused reassured her that she would heal.
After he was done with her, he did the same thing to the 11 year old granddaughter.
She went on to state that on another day at the mountain, her grandfather started with her and when he was done it was the 11 year old’s turn.
The court heard that after he had sexual intercourse with his first complainant granddaughter, his worm had some jelly like substance of which when they asked him he indicated that his granddaughter was sweet and he was to make her his wife and they were to have children.
It was her evidence that the accused had sexual intercourse with her again at the kitchen and the bedroom. In all these times, the 11 year old was present but he would start off with her and proceed to have sexual intercourse with the 11 year old.
Again, nothing significant came out of her cross examination, her evidence thus stood.
The court was alive to the dangers attendant upon child testimony. The danger stems from their vivid imaginations and the tendency to fantasize.
According to the Court, It is accepted that children may believe their fantasies and relate them as reality because they believe them, hence the need for the court to exercise caution in dealing with their testimony.
The children were well able to observe, to recollect and to give a clear narration of what had transpired, hence they clearly had the capacity to understand and express intelligent answers to the questions asked.
The court, taking into consideration the age of the victims, their detailed and consistent testimonies, and the medical evidence, ruled that the accused, had indeed sexually abused his granddaughters
This was evidenced as both juveniles narrated how the accused would pluck out branches, spread them on the ground and thereafter proceed to sexually abuse them while herding cattle.
Again they both referred to the words uttered by the accused that the first complainant was sweet as such he was to make her his wife.
The 9 year old spoke of an incident wherein after the sexual intercourse the accused’s urinating worm came out with jelly like substance, and hence with such recollection narrated with clarity, the court had no any reason to doubt their evidence.
It was considered that even if it were to be said they were imagining and fantasizing, they could not go to the extent of imagining that their grandfather would have sexual intercourse with them and then after his sexual organ would have jelly like substance, he utters words to the effect that the first complainant was sweet.
The recipient of complaint one, testified to the court that she observed the first complainant walking with difficulty as she was limping.
She enquired to the cause of which at first she attributed it to a stick. She followed the complainant outside and found her crying, she asked as to why she was crying and then the complainant narrated what had happened.
In aggrevation, Prosecutor Lethisiwe Khumalo said, “Your worship, the offender pleaded not guilty to this offence thereby wasting the court’s time and showing that he was unremorseful. He committed a very serious offence that the community would frown at because of its heinous nature.”
“Further aggravating this offence is the fact that the two victims are vulnerable as they are children. Also the age gap between the offender and the victim is very wide ranging between 47 to 49 years.”
“The offender was guardian to the victims. The victim’s mothers entrusted him to look after their children during school holidays. He took advantage of their trust. The fact that the offender is the grandfather to the victims, means that he is related to the victims within a prohibited degree. Further the fact that he was the guardian also means that he was in position of authority at that particular time, hence he had direct influence over the victims.
Prosecutor Khumalo further stated that the victims also regarded that residence as a sanctuary where they would feel safe under the care of their grandfather. From the evidence of the medical report, it is clear that there was high degree of physical harm and the manner in which this offence was commited was cruel and traumatic to say the least. The very fact that he was able to have sexual intercourse interchangeably with the children and for them to view or witness each other’s abuse was deemed diabolical by the Prosecutor.
“He sexually groomed the two young children. As evidence would show, he would use words such as “umnandi” meaning you are sweet and words like “uyangichemisa” meaning you make me ejaculate, such sexually demeaning language being used to young children. Surely such words would forever stay in their minds and affect them negatively in the long run. Clearly your worship the aggravating factors far outweigh the mitigating factors.”
The 11 year old girl’s mother testified in Court stating that,” she is now disturbed mentally in the sense that at times you would discover that she would be aloof. Sometimes when you talk to her she is in a baffled state. She is always complaining of back pain. Each time I take her to the hospital they prescribe medication for her which at times I do not afford. She is no longer able to play with other children, she is someone who separates herself from other children. On my side this really pained me. I really trusted the accused person as my father. Every problem I had I would share it with the accused person because he is the only paternal parent I am left with. 1 wasn’t aware as to whether there was some sort of revenge against me and the child. It really hurt me your worship.”
The accused person’s defence to the charges levelled against him was deemed weak by the Court.
He in his defence outline told the court that he was not left with the children at the rural home. Though he attempted to remove himself from the scene the evidence placed him right there.
During his defence case he ended up conceding that he was at the rural home with the children at the material time.
He also confirmed that he would go with them to herd cattle. He confirmed that they would go to the mountain and to the fields of two neighbours.
The Court found it surprising that with all this, he still protested his innocence. His defence witnesses did not take his case any further.
The first witness, clearly had issues with the first complainant’s mother. It was his evidence that the children especially the first complainant was not to be believed as she was fond of lying.
He went on to state that she had lied against the accused persona twice at the police station. Whether that was true or not, the Court considered that it could not stand in the face of real evidence on record.
In passing judgement, the residing Magistrate considered that the accused person subjected the two juveniles to trauma as he would sexually abuse them in full view of the other.
It was also considered that he introduced the children to sexual language which for their ages is traumatic. He is related to them in a prohibited degree. He took advantage of their vulnerability and sexually abused them.
To palliate the severity of the sentence, the court treated some counts as one for purposes of sentence.
On count 1 and 3, the accused was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment. On count 2, he was found guilty and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment. He was further sentenced to 15 years in prison on count 4, 6 and 8.
The accused person was also sentenced to 15 years in prison for count 5, 7 and 9.
He is to serve a total of 60 years imprisonment if he is still lucky to be alive.
Leave a comment on our Letters to the Editor link:
https://chat.whatsapp.com/LM3tFyJZIQZKGRMwZHiPLE
Zim GBC News ©2024