The Supreme Court of Zimbabwe is set to deliver judgement tomorrow on an appeal by two convicted killers that were sentenced to death for the murder of seven-year-old Tapiwa Makore from Murehwa.
The convicted killers are Tapiwa Makore, an uncle of the deceased and Tafadzwa Shamba, a herdboy.
The duo were tried and found guilty of the murder by High Court judge Justice Munamato Mutevedzi.
Makore was murdered in September 2020 and his body was dismembered into multiple pieces.
His torso was discovered being devoured by dogs the morning after he was murdered while his other body parts were found shoved in a pit latrine.
The boy’s torso was buried a year after he was killed while his head remains missing.
The two convicts denied the allegations of murdering the boy during trial although Shamba had confessed earlier on, giving vivid descriptions on how they killed the boy.
Shamba and Tapiwa Makore senior approached the Supreme Court to appeal against the death sentence arguing that the High Court erred in convicting and sentencing them.
- Fresh land invasions hit Whitecliff
- Pomona cash row escalates
- Border Timbers targets European markets
- SA name strong A side for Zim tour
Keep Reading
Supreme Court judges Nicholas Mathonsi, Antonia Guvava and Joseph Musakwa reserved the judgement in February after hearing the case.
The duo represented by their lawyers Kudzai Kadzere of Kadzere, Hungwe and Mandevere Legal Practitioners argued that the High Court misdirected itself in finding them guilty of murder.
Makore senior submitted that the High Court misdirected itself in failing to give him the benefit of the doubt arguing that he was not present when the deceased was murdered.
He argued that there was no direct evidence or enough circumstantial evidence tying him to the murder.
Mkaore senior told the court that he did not assign Shamba to kill the deceased.
Makore senior said items that were found at his home do not prove that he assisted in the commission of the crime.
"The fact that a black plastic bag was allegedly found at the appellant’s (Makore senior) home does not mean that it is the same plastic bag that the first accused (Shamba) confessed as having been used to carry the body parts of the now deceased,” his lawyers submitted..
“No forensic examination was done to determine if there was DNA of the now deceased on it.
“Further, most people have black plastic bags in their homes so it cannot be concluded that the appellant gave the first accused person the black plastic for the commission of the crime.
“There was nothing peculiar about there being a black plastic bag at the Appellant’s home.”
Shamba and Makore senior also told the court that the blood that was found on their trousers was that of a chicken that was slaughtered by the former.
“The appellant was not present at the scene of the crime, nor did he engage in any preparatory acts that would indicate his involvement,” he submitted.
“Transparency regarding evidence the appellant did not attempt to conceal the blood stained trousers discovered by his cousin brothers’ wives.
“This cooperation indicates a lack of guilt and willingness to assist in the investigation.”
Makore senior said Shamba wanted to fix him by implicating him in the murder case.
He also argued that the death sentence penalty induced a sense of shock.
