Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Rittmann gets life in prison

Home Front Page News Rittmann gets life in prison

WINDHOEK – Rachel Rittmann, who hired an ex-lover to kill her husband in August 2013, has been sentenced to life in prison. The 49-year-old Rittmann and her former lover Richardo Rhyno du Preez, 35, were both convicted of murder read with the provisions of the Combating of Domestic Violence Act for 35-year old Rudolph Henry Rittmann. 

Yesterday, Judge Christie Liebenberg sentenced Rachel, whom he called the mastermind behind the brutal murder, to life imprisonment for her role in the killing, while du Preez received a total custodial term of 34 years imprisonment. 

Both Rachel and Du Preez were sentenced to three years for conspiracy to commit murder. 
Rachel got one year for theft and both eight years for defeating or obstructing the course of justice. 
However, the judge ordered that the sentences on conspiracy and theft run concurrent with the murder sentence and that four of the eight years on defeating or obstructing the course of justice run concurrently with the murder sentence. 

“Like a moth drawn to a flame, so were the deceased and first accused romantically attracted to the second accused, unfortunately with the same devastating consequences: Like the flame to the moth, she consumed both under the guise of love – the one paying with his life, the other having to pay the price for committing murder,” Judge Liebenberg opened his sentencing yesterday in the Windhoek High Court.

According to the judge, the moral blameworthiness of Rachel is much higher than that of Du Preez as she was the one who hatched the plan to kill her husband for his pension and insurance payout.
He disagreed with the suggestion by her defence counsel that she suffered from an anxiety disorder, which impacted on her normal state of mind.

On the contrary, the judge said, the evidence established persistent behaviour over a period of months to plan and execute the murder of her husband with the assistance of Du Preez.
“During this process, she took several preparatory steps to put in place the deceased’s will and life insurance policies as regards beneficiaries,” the judge said and continued: “She took a calculated decision when the murder should take place and facilitated its execution at their home in Gobabis.”

The judge went on to say that the evidence also showed that Rachel during and after the commissioning of the crimes was what can only be described as calm and goal-oriented. 

According to the judge, the murder and even so the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime, undoubtedly makes it a very serious offence.
“It is evident that the motive behind the killing was exclusively for the accused persons’ personal and selfish reasons.”

He said they were so obsessed of getting the deceased out of the way that they completely disregarded what affect it would have on the deceased’s children and the pain and suffering it would bring to his family.
“As the evidence established, it impacted severely on the health of the deceased’s parents and significantly reduced their quality of life thereafter,” the judge said.

 “As for their minor daughter, this young child must for the rest of her life live under the stigma that her father was murdered by her own mother.”

 “The deceased was virtually ambushed by his wife and taken by surprise whilst asleep in bed at home, a place where he was supposed to be safe.”