Two of the three people convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment by the High Court want the court to grant them leave to appeal their convictions and sentences in the Supreme Court.
David Kondjara (40) and Donald Hindjou (31) were convicted of murder with direct intent and sentenced to life imprisonment on 4 March 2022.
They were convicted together with Anastancia Lubinda (40) who is said to have hired them to kill her husband Peter Rosco Muleke who was 36 at the time of his demise for a fee of N$5 000. The body of Muleke sorrounded by bloody rocks was found near Penduka in Goreangab on 30 March 2015.
Judge Johanna Salionga found that they actively participated in the plot to murder Lubinda’s husband.
One of their co-accused, David Matali died in custody.
The judge acquitted two of the co-accused, Abuid Uazeua (40) and Oviritje musician Dollam Tjitjahuma after the State conceded they failed to conclusively prove their case.
Lubinda, Kondjara and Hindjou were convicted on the strength of confessions they made to different magistrates, in which they admitted to being at the crime scene, but denied participating in the brutal act. They disputed the confessions during the trial and said they were unduly influenced to make the confessions.
Salionga, however, admitted the confessions into evidence.
Not satisfied, they now want to appeal both convictions and sentences in the Supreme Court. According to them, the effective term of imprisonment sentence of life is shockingly inappropriate in that it induces a sense of shock and is unreasonable in the circumstances and no reasonable court would have imposed it.
They say that the court was wrong in relying on circumstantial evidence, as there was no eyewitnesses who had witnessed the commission of the offence of which the appellants have been charged, convicted and subsequently sentenced.
Further, they said, the court relied on confessions and/or statements, hence erred in fact and in law in the absence of proven evidence against them. The convicts said the court further erred in law in relying and/or in applying the doctrine or principles relating to common purpose, hence to convict the appellants and whilst all other co-accused were acquitted. It erred in law in finding that the only and real issue to decide is that conspiracy to commit the offence does not find application, but rather that of common purpose against the appellants only. They say the court also erred in law and/or fact, more particularly in not having regard that no evidence was adduced by State witness Nuule (investigating officer), yet the court made references thereto in support of the State’s case.
With regard to the sentence, the appellants said that the judge failed to take into account that they were both first offenders, they have spent seven years in custody pending trial, the effective term of life imprisonment is shockingly inappropriate.
They are still waiting for legal aid to appoint a legal representative for them.
Salionga postponed the matter to 29 July.
The State was represented by Marthino Olivier during the trial, Kondjara by Paulus Shilongo and Hindjou by Ray Silungwe.